Patna High Court
Jyoti Kumari @ Lovely Kumari @ LovelyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Jyoti Kumari, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a theft case (PS case No. 591 of 2024) under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that jewellery and a licensed pistol were stolen from her household, while the petitioner contended that she was falsely implicated based on a co‑accused’s confessional statement and that police had improperly linked her to nine other cases without proper seizure lists or forensic verification. She argued that the recovered items were ordinary ornaments kept by her husband’s jewellery shop and that she had no involvement in the alleged crime. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and several conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, including regular court appearances and police monitoring. The order emphasized that its observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations of theft and false implication.
- Whether the lack of a proper seizure list, absence of forensic verification, and reliance on a co‑accused’s statement justify granting bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are appropriate and sufficient to ensure the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 305(a), 331(4)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- theft
- jewellery
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 331
- Section 305
- Section 438
- Section 482
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91184 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-591 Year-2024 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
Jyoti Kumari @ Lovely Kumari @ Lovely W/O Ravi Kumar R/O Sakin- East
Nand-Gola, P.S- Malsalami, Patna City, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in
connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 591 of 2024 registered
for the offence(s) under Section(s) 331(4) and 305(a) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. The prosecution case is that one Anjali Kumari
gave a report that while her family members had gone to
Deoghar, she was informed that a theft has been committed and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91184 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/5
when the entire family came back, they found the Almirah
broken and the entire goods scattered and it was found that the
entire jewellery of the house along with a licensed pistol etc.
were stolen away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and her
name has transpired in the confessional statement of one co-
accused, namely, Golu Kumar, who was apprehended in
connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 591 of 2024. It has
been submitted that the police thereafter implicated the
petitioner in nine other cases, which was lodged against
unknown persons, merely taking the statement of co-
accused/Glou Kumar into account. It has further been submitted
that from the perusal of the case diary, it would be evident that
no seizure-list has been attached to the same, however, one
seizure-list has been appended with the FIR, from the perusal of
which it would be evident that the seizure-list contains the
numbers of all the ten cases. It has also been submitted that till
date, the T.I.P. of the said materials have not been done and it is
an admitted fact that the husband of the petitioner runs a
jewellery shop in the name of Krishna Jewelers. The learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the recovered articles are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91184 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
3/5
regular ornaments which were the part of the ornaments, which
were kept by the husband of the petitioner for sale and this is
one of the reasons why the same has not been put on T.I.P. as
none of the claimants have come forward till date. It has lastly
been submitted that the petitioner does not have any concern
with the running of the jewellery shop of her husband and, in
fact, she is a housewife.
5. The 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 and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of her arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the
case is pending in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 591
of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91184 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
4/5
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the
following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be her
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
found that she has concealed her criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
of her bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(v) In view of the antecedent of the petitioner, the
petitioner is directed to appear before the Superintendent
of Police, Patna within fifteen (15) days of her release
with a copy of this order and every two weeks thereafter
for the next nine months. The conduct of the petitioner
will be kept under watch in this period by the concerned
Superintendent of Police and if it is found wanting in any
respect, a report shall be made to the Court concerned by
him to initiate a proceeding for cancellation of bail of the
petitioner for reasons of misuse of bail. After reporting to
the Superintendent of Police, a certificate will be filed by
the petitioner before the Court concerned.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91184 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
5/5
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.