Dipmala Devi @ Deepmala Devi @ Deepmal Devi Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73649 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1824 Year-2018 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar

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

Dipmala Devi @ Deepmala Devi @ Deepmal Devi W/O Hemant Prasad Gupta Resident of Naya tola Near Kali Mandir P.O.- Katihar, P.S.- Katihar Town, District- Katihar

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Ram Bahadur Chaudhary S/O Late Dorai Chaudhary R/O Fasia Shanti Tola, P.s. and Dist.- Katihar.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dwij Raj, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 18-11-2025

¶13

Heard Mr. Dwij Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶14

and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest connection with Katihar Complaint Case, C.A. No. 1824 of 2018, dated 07.08.2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (N.I. Act) and Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code but the learned Court below has taken cognizance under Section 138 of N.I. Act and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per allegation in the complaint petition, the

¶17

cheque issued by the petitioner has been dishonored.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73649 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 2/3

¶20

petitioner has clean antecedent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per allegation in the complaint petition, the cheque issued by the petitioner has been dishonored. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction has filed a supplementary affidavit stating therein that the petitioner is ready to pay the cheque amount i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/- ( Rupees Two Lakhs).

¶21

Learned APP for the State has no objection in this

¶22

regard.

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner is ready to deposit the cheque amount in favour of the complainant namely, Ram Bahadur Choudhary which is subject matter of the present case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC, Katihar in connection with Katihar Complaint Case, C.A. No. 1824 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions :-

¶24

(i) The petitioner shall produce Rs. 2,00,000/- ( Rupees Two Lakhs) by way of demand draft in favour of the complainant namely, Ram Bahadur Choudhary within a period of six weeks at

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73649 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 3/3

¶26

the time of furnishing bail bond and the learned Court below is directed to hand over the same in favour of the informant or his representative.

¶27

(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶28

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶29

(iv) And, further condition that 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 step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶30

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶31

Ibrar//-

¶32

U T

Dipmala Devi @ Deepmala Devi @ Deepmal Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipmala Devi @ Deepmala Devi @ Deepmal 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

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramesh Halwai @ Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandan Chaudhary @ Kariya Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Gaytri Kumari @ Gayatri Kumari Vs The State of Bihar