Patna High Court
Nirmala DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
Nirmala Devi and Prakash Ram applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 143, 61(2)(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., alleging involvement in the trafficking of minor girls. The prosecution’s case rests mainly on the confessional statement of a co‑accused, Sumit, who named the petitioners as participants in the trade. The petitioners argued that they have clean antecedents, that the confessional statement lacks evidentiary value, and that no other material links them to the offence. The State opposed bail, contending that the allegations are serious, that the investigation requires the petitioners’ custody, and that leniency cannot be shown on technical grounds. The Court, after considering the submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, holding that the seriousness of the allegations and the need for further investigation outweigh the petitioners’ claims of false implication.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only incriminating material is a confessional statement of a co‑accused.
- Whether the seriousness of alleged human‑trafficking offences justifies denial of bail despite the petitioners’ clean record.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 143, 3(5), 61(2)(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- human trafficking
- minor girls
- confessional statement
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86396 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2025 Thana- PATKHAULI District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Nirmala Devi Wife of Prakash Ram R/o Village - Patilar, Police Station
-Chautarwa, District - West Champaran.
2. Prakash Ram Son of Chuni Ram R/o Village - Patilar, Police Station
-Chautarwa, District - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kr Singh No. 1
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 143, 61(2)(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner
no.1 is a woman and the informant alleges that she runs an NGO
namely Jan Shakti Foundation for upliftment of women. Further,
on 02.09.2025, she received an information that minor girls are
being procured for their transportation to Haryana and
Rajasthan. On information, she along with the police force
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86396 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
reached the P.O. and four persons were arrested who disclosed
their name as Sumit, Sonveer, Shobha and Shabana Khatoon.
Further, Sumit disclosed that Shobha and Shabana procured
minors on pretext of marriage and were taken to Haryana and
Rajasthan where Sonveer used to sell them for Rs.One Lac to
1.5 Lac and Shobha along with Shabana used to get Rs.15,000/-
per girl. Further, Sumit also disclosed that petitioners and other
named accused persons are also involved in the trade.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that name of the petitioners transpired in
the confessional statement of Sumit in police custody, which
does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that
during the course of investigation, nothing transpired which
could even remotely connect the petitioners with the offence
except for confession of Sumit. It is also submitted that Sumit
and Sonveer has been granted the privilege of regular bail by
this Court.
5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad
vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application. It is
submitted that allegations are serious. It is fairly submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86396 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
no doubt, name of the petitioners transpired in the confessional
statement of Sumit, but then, whether petitioners were involved
in the occurrence or not that requires to be investigated for
which custody of the petitioners is necessary. It is also submitted
that flesh trade is gaining grounds in State of Bihar also, as
such, leniency be not shown to the petitioners on technical
ground.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. The prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…