Patna High Court
Guria DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and the conditions imposed.
Summary
Guria Devi was arrested in connection with a murder case (Singhaul P.S. Case No. 112 of 2025) and charged under Sections 351(3), 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that she called the informant’s son, who was later killed by co‑accused, and claimed she had confessed to the police. The petitioner contended she had a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated and that the FIR was fabricated. The court examined the material, the alleged confession and the seriousness of the offences, and decided to grant bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order was conditioned on verification of her criminal antecedent and compliance with court directives.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to a person accused of offences under Sections 351(3), 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the alleged confession and the nature of the alleged murder offence preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and clean antecedent justify bail despite the prosecution’s opposition.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 351(3), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 351
- Section 103
- Section 61
- false implication
- confession
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76436 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2025 Thana- Singhaul District- Begusarai
======================================================
Guria Devi Wife of Ajay Ram @ Ajay Mochi Resident of village rachiyahi
Dhobi Tola, P.S.- Singhaul, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Randhir Kumar No 1, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Randhir Kumar No 1, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Prasoon Kumar, learned counsel for the
Informant as well as Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
30.06.2024 in connection with Singhaul P.S. Case No. 112 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 28.06.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 351(3), 103(1), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,
2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant
alleged that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons
killed his son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76436 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the
F.I.R. As per allegation in the FIR the petitioner had called the
son of the informant and later on, son of the informant was
killed by the petitioner and other co-accused persons. Although
the petitioner is named in the FIR but it has come during
investigation, which is recorded in paragraph-31, 32 and 59 of
the case diary that the petitioner had only called the informant’s
son and he was killed by other accused persons and police after
investigation has submitted charge-sheet. The petitioner is in
custody since 30.06.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for the Informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner
has confessed her guilt before the police and stated that she had
called the son of the informant and other co-accused persons
killed the son of the informant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76436 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M.,
Begusarai in connection with Singhaul P.S. Case No. 112 of
2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…