Patna High Court

Sunita Kumari @ Sunita DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunita Kumari, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a theft case registered under Sections 305(a), 331(4) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, looted cash, jewellery and household articles from the informant’s house. The petitioner contended that she was innocent, had no material linking her to the crime, no stolen items were recovered from her possession, and she possessed a clean antecedent. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, noting the lack of concrete evidence, the general nature of the accusation, the absence of recovered stolen property, and the petitioner’s clean record, allowed the anticipatory bail. The order directed that if arrested within eight weeks, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. in a case based solely on suspicion and lacking material evidence.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 305(a), 331(4), 3(5), 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal procedure
suspicion
theft
clean antecedents
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85840 of 2025

                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sunita Kumari @ Sunita Devi W/o- Rajesh Kumar Saw @ Rajesh Saw
                 Village- Simarbar PS- Mohanpur Dist- Gaya

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner     :        Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State          :        Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 305(a),

                   331(4) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, informant suspects that all

                   the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner,

                   committed theft in her house and looted cash, jewellery and

                   other household articles.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85840 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                            2/3




          committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the

          occurrence and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this

          case only on suspicion. Save and except suspicion, there is no

          material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in

          the alleged offence. No stolen articles were recovered from

          possession of this petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, fact that no

          stolen articles were recovered from possession of this petitioner

          and clean antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of

          anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.

                        7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-2 nd, Sherghati at

          Gaya in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 369 of 2024,
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85840 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

                       B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…