Sarita Devi @ Sarita Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajendra Nath Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Asha Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 06-08-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences under Sections 310(2), 317(3) of B.N.S.

¶15

3. As per the prosecution case, five miscreants had looted jewellery from the Jiva Jewellery shop and then kept the same in a bag and fled away.

¶16

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and their names have transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused namely Suraj Kumar. It is

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38130 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/3

¶18

lastly submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedent and petitioner no. 1 is in custody since 09.02.2025 and petitioner no. 2 is in custody since 11.02.2025.

¶19

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶20

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) on each of them with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 98/2025 subject to the conditions :-

¶21

a. One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.

¶22

b. The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

¶23

c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶24

d. The Court below shall verify the criminal

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38130 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 3/3

¶26

antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the aforementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶27

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made

¶28

in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

¶29

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶30

tusharika/-

Sarita Devi @ Sarita Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarita Devi @ Sarita Kumari 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

Ramjee Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Sandeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rambahadur Prasad Kushwaha @ Ram Bahadur Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Praveen Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mantun Singh @ Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Giri Vs The State of Bihar