Punam Devi Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19208 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-390 Year-2024 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj

¶3

======================================================

¶4

1. Vakeel Rai S/O Late Manager Rai R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶5

Arun Singh @ Arun Kumar Singh S/O Bhagwanjee Singh R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

with

¶12

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21235 of 2025

¶13

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-390 Year-2024 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj

¶14

======================================================

¶15

1. Punam Devi W/O Surendra Singh R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶16

1. Neeraj Singh S/O Surendra Singh R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶17

1. Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Pankaj Kumar S/O Surendra Singh R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶18

Hariom Singh @ Hariom Kumar Singh S/O Surendra Singh R/O Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶19

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶20

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 19208 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, Advocate Ms. Kumari Shreya, Advocate (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21235 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP For the Informant : Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, Advocate Ms. Kumari Shreya, Advocate ======================================================

¶21

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19208 of 2025(4) dt.04-12-2025 2/4

¶23

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

4 04-12-2025

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as informant and the learned APP for the State.

¶27

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 390 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

¶28

The informant claims the land in dispute alleging that it was a gifted property, in favour of his wife from brother of her father-in-law. He alleges that the petitioners, Punam Devi, Neeraj Singh and Pankaj Kumar Singh (in Cr. Misc. No. 21235 of 2025) sold that land fraudulently in favour of Vakeel Rai and Arun Singh (petitioners in Cr. Misc. No. 19208 of 2025).

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that so far as petitioners Vakeel Rai and Arun Singh are concerned, they are bona fide purchasers. He has further submitted that both the parties are agnates belonging to same branch from the ancestor Arjun Singh. The informant sides are lineal descendants of Narad Singh, the third son of Arjun Singh whereas the petitioners, namely, Punam Devi, Pankaj Kumar Singh are lineal

¶30

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19208 of 2025(4) dt.04-12-2025 3/4

¶31

descendants of Fateh Bahadur Singh, the first son of Arjun Singh. According to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the properties, said to have been alienated by the petitioners, namely, Punam Devi, Neeraj Singh and Pankaj Kumar Singh are the property which fell in the share of these petitioners. They are rightful owner of the property and they sold that property in favour of the petitioners, namely, Vakeel Rai and Arun Singh.

¶32

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners by submitting that in lifetime of Surendra Singh, his wife Punam Singh has no right to alienate that property.

¶33

Be that as it may, it is a subject matter of civil dispute and the ultimate remedy lies in the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.

¶34

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Gopalganj in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 390 of 2024,

¶35

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19208 of 2025(4) dt.04-12-2025 4/4

¶36

subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./ 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.

¶37

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶38

priyanka/-

¶39

U T

Punam Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punam Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Laddu Singh @ Sameer Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Babita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sujit Yadav @ Sujit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bigani Devi @ Vigani Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Vakeel Rai Vs The State of Bihar