Urmila Kuer Vs The State of Bihar

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that petitioners had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.58179 of 2023 and the same was permitted to be withdrawn by an order dated 01.05.2024 but thereafter Urmila Kuer again filed Cr. Misc.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23299 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 2/3

¶21

No.56621 of 2024 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 12.09.2024 with certain conditions, as Urmila Kuer before the court had accepted that the land has been sold and she is willing to repay the amount to the informant, for which, she had given an undertaking that at the time of surrender, in terms of the order dated 12.09.2024, the amount shall be paid to the informant but then Urmila Kuer was not in a position to arrange the amount for giving it to the informant hence could not surrender within the time stipulated in the order dated 12.09.2024 in Cr. Misc. No.56621 of 2024. It is further submitted that thereafter Urmila Kuer filed Cr. Misc. No.80735 of 2024, seeking extension of time for surrender but then the same also came to be dismissed by an order dated 06.12.2024, as such, it is submitted that this is the third anticipatory bail application of Urmila Kuer and second anticipatory bail application of Gautam Kumar. It is next submitted that petitioners and informant are related and the dispute is with respect of selling of land and the petitioners were willing to return the amount but then could not arrange the amount in time hence could not surrender but now petitioners have repaid the entire amount of Rs.12 lakhs to the informant and in support of the same, a supplementary affidavit has been filed along with a

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23299 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 3/3

¶23

joint compromise petition filed by the parties before the learned trial court on 09.03.2026.

¶24

Learned APP also fairly submits that since the dispute stands resolved, hence sending the petitioners to jail would be an empty formality.

¶25

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of fourteen weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Madanpur P.S. Case No. 219 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶26

However, the informant would be at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners, in the event, if the case has not been compromised and the amount of Rs. 12 lakhs has not been paid to the informant, as recorded in the supplementary affidavit.

¶27

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶28

amit/- U T

Urmila Kuer v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmila Kuer 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

Ravindra Kumar @ Ravindra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Dileep Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Monu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nazrul @ Najrul Haque Vs The State of Bihar

Amar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Monaf @ Munaf Vs The State of Bihar