Patna High Court
Jyoti Kumari @ Lovely Kumari @ LovelyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail must be granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Jyoti Kumari sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a theft case (Patliputra P.S. Case No. 553 of 2024) under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that jewellery worth Rs. 10-12 lakh was stolen from a house whose husband runs a jewellery shop. The petitioner contended that she was falsely implicated based solely on a co‑accused’s confessional statement, that no seizure‑list was attached, and that the recovered items were regular stock of her husband’s shop. The court examined the material, noted the lack of direct evidence against her, and applied Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It granted anticipatory bail with a Rs. 10,000 bond, two sureties, and several conditions including regular reporting to the Superintendent of Police. The order was made without prejudice to the trial and the observations would not affect the substantive proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC read with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the material on record justifies denial of bail given the alleged false implication and lack of seizure‑list.
- Whether the conditions imposed are 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)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- theft
- jewellery
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- CrPC 438
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92054 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-553 Year-2024 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
Jyoti Kumari @ Lovely Kumari @ Lovely Wife of Ravi Kumar Resident of
Sakin- East Nand-Gola, P.S.- Malsalami, Patna City, District- 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 : Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, 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. 553 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 Gyanendra Kumar
gave a report that while he along with his family members had
gone to Madhubani, he was informed that a theft has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92054 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/5
committed and when he came back, he found the Almirah
broken and the entire goods scattered and it was found that the
entire jewellery of the house, worth Rs. 10-12 lcas, 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 prepared in Patliputra P.S. Case No. 591 of
2024, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92054 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
3/5
recovered articles are 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. 553
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.92054 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.92054 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
5/5
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…