Patna High Court

Sushila DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Bail may be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties and surrender within eight weeks.

Summary

The petitioner, Sushila Devi, sought bail fearing arrest under Section 24 of the Pre‑Conception and Pre‑Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC & PNDT) Act after a raid on a centre named "Maa Lakshmi Ultrasound". The prosecution alleged that the petitioner removed a portable ultrasound machine during the raid, while the defence argued that the FIR was based solely on presumption and that the machine had been sent for repair with prior notice to the civil surgeon. The court examined whether the presumption in the FIR justified denial of bail and considered the applicability of bail provisions under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Finding no substantive evidence of an offence and noting the petitioner’s clean antecedents, the court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to surrender within eight weeks. The bail order was conditioned on compliance with the stipulated terms.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case under Section 24 of the PC & PNDT Act.
Whether the FIR based on presumption suffices to deny bail.
Whether Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, can be invoked to impose bail conditions.

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482

Subjects

bail
PC & PNDT Act
Section 24
presumption
ultrasound machine
pre‑natal diagnostics
criminal procedure
Section 482
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91740 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2024 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                    District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Sushila Devi Wife of Yogendra Pandit R/o- Surhi, P.S.- Shakurabad, District -
                 Jehanabad
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Amit Anand
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Raj Kishor Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence under Section 24 of the PC & PNDT

                   Act.

                                3. The prosecution, in short, is that a raid was

                   conducted by BDO, Ghosi under the leadership of the District

                   Panchayati Raj Officer, Jehanabad on 27.09.2024 at about 01:00

                   PM, wherein it is alleged that the shutter of the room with the

                   banner of "Maa Lakshmi Ultrasound" was down and no proper

                   response was received on the number displayed on the banner

                   and the team found a fresh gallon of water & water was spread

                   on the floor and it was presumed that on apprehension of said

                   raid, the petitioner removed portable ultrasound machine and

                   fled away.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91740 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                     petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. From

                     bare perusal of F.I.R., it is apparent that entire F.I.R. is based on

                     presumption, since no ultrasound machine was found on the

                     centre, but fact remains that said ultrasound machine was sent

                     for repairing, since it was not functioning properly, for which,

                     petitioner gave prior intimation to the concerned Civil Surgeon.

                     No case under the provision of PC & PNDT Act is made out on

                     such presumption.               Petitioner is lady and claims clean

                     antecedent.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for State opposes the bail petition.

                                  6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the

                     above named petitioner, in the event of arrest/surrender within a

                     period of eight weeks from today, 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

                     C.J.M., Jehanabad in connection with G.O. Case No. 83 of

                     2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 of the

                     Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                                      (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…