Mina Devi Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3332 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

Mina Devi Wife of Uday Kumar Verma Resident of Village- Gobardhan Bigha, P.S.- Katri Sarai, District- Nalanda

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushkar Narayan Shahi, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Vibhakar Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 05-02-2025

¶10

Heard the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, learned Advocate for the informant and the learned APP for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 46 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

¶12

Based upon the written report, the informant alleges that co-accused Uday Kumar Verma along with the petitioner came to the house of the informant and with much persuasion asked him for a loan of Rs. 30 lakhs for business. The informant gave cash amount of Rs. 30 lakhs to co-accused Uday Kumar Verma on 28.08.2021, in token thereof a receipt was prepared and the petitioner in lieu of accepting the amount, put her

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3332 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 2/4

¶14

signature. It is further alleged that a few days later, the accused persons have further requested for Rs. 7 lakhs and in this way, the accused persons have taken away Rs. 37 lakhs, as a loan, but they did not return the same, despite the demand being made. The husband of the petitioner on much pressure, has issued a cheque for Rs. 2 lakhs to the informant, which also got bounced on account of insufficient fund.

¶15

Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner referring to the FIR contended that the entire allegation revolves around co-accused Uday Kumar Verma and only on account of the petitioner being wife of the said Uday Kumar Verma , and being the witness to the loan, who put her signature on the document, she has been made accused and sent behind the custody. The petitioner is a PACS Chairman and being a public representative, she was apprehended by the police and now she has been incarcerated since 06.11.2024. The investigation of the crime is complete and charge-sheet has been submitted.

¶16

On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioner bears two criminal antecedent of identical nature, which suggest that the petitioner along with her husband are involved in identical nature of crime.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3332 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 3/4

¶18

Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner is a lady and having incarcerated for over a period of three months; now the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been submitted coupled with the fact that the crime, in question, is triable by the Magistrate, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/(Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 46 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:-

¶19

(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the

¶20

trial.

¶21

(ii) She will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

¶22

(iii) She will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.

¶23

(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, her bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3332 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 4/4

¶25

(v) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.

¶26

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶27

shivank/-

¶28

U T

Mina Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

Mina 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

Arun Kumar @ Arun Paswan, Vs The State of Bihar through Commissioner-cum-Secretary

Neeraj Kumar @ Niraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Juber Vs The State of Bihar

Lalbabu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mohan Mahato Vs The State of Bihar