Sunita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 03-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

¶13

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 1407 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

3. Prosecution case in short is that one Tavish Nisha @ Lalu was in illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased (petitioner) since last six years and co-accused along with petitioner hanged the son of the informant (deceased).

¶15

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 30-09-2023. Petitioner is a lady of clean antecedent.

¶16

5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47440 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/3

¶18

counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of suspicion. It is submitted that there is no eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. It is next submitted that there is no complaint about the illicit relation between the petitioner and co-accused prior to this FIR and it is falsely alleged that the illicit relation was there. It is submitted that there is contradictory statements in the FIR itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since petitioner is female and she had undergone long incarceration, hence, she deserves the privilege of regular bail. Other co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07-05-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22414 of 2024.

¶19

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Referring to paragraph No. 9 of the case diary, it is submitted that witness has supported the prosecution case.

¶20

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner, claim based on parity, petitioner being a female and clean antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand)

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47440 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 3/3

¶23

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 1407 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:

¶24

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

¶25

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶26

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶27

Raj Kishore/- U T

Sunita Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita 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 Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Jaiswal @ Satya Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Ranjan @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Rana Kumar @ Tunni Singh @ Tunni @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Devendra Prasad Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Shankar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar