Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Geeta DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing her to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Geeta Devi, the first wife of a man who allegedly entered a second marriage and assaulted her and her daughter, was arrested under multiple sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. She contended that the FIR was filed by the second wife to malign her and that she has no prior criminal record. The prosecution sought to keep her in custody, while the petitioner’s counsel argued that the real perpetrator is the husband. The court considered the nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s lack of antecedents, and her custody since 17‑11‑2025. It ordered that she be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the same amount, subject to the satisfaction of the concerned ACJM.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriateness of granting regular bail to the petitioner accused under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 82(1), 82(2), 89, 109(1), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita?
  • Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedent warrant bail despite the serious nature of the offences?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • domestic violence
  • marriage
  • false accusation
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • sections 126,115,118,82,89,109,351,352,3

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8148 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2025 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Geeta Devi W/O Laldeo Raut R/O Village- Balabhakhar, P.S- Phulparas,
                 Distt.- Madhubani.
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Jaishankar Kumar Yadav, Advocate
                                                  Ms. Riya Raj, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Amarshakti, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-02-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case

                   no.423 of 2025 registered under sections 126 (2), 115(2), 118,

                   82(1), 82(2), 89, 109(1), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that her husband who was married to the petitioner herein

                   having suppressed the said fact, entered into a marriage with

                   her. It is further stated that her husband, the petitioner herein as

                   also the petitioner’s daughter assaulted her as described in the

                   FIR. She was treated in the hospital.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. It would
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8148 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       transpire that the allegation of suppression and second marriage

                       is against her husband and not the petitioner herein. The FIR has

                       been lodged by the informant to build up her defence having

                       married the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner, who is a

                       lady, is in custody since 17.11.2025 and has no criminal

                       antecedent.        She      undertakes         to   cooperate   in   the

                       investigation/trial.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P

                       for the State.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in

                       the FIR, the petitioner being the first wife of the husband of the

                       informant, the petitioner being in custody since 17.11.2025 and

                       not having any criminal antecedent, the petitioner is directed to

                       be enlarged on bail in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case

                       no.423 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

                       Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                       satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M-II, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-

U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.