Munakiya Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

Munakiya Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail allowed: petitioner to be released on arrest or surrender within six weeks on bail bond of Rs.10,000/- 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 Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) B.N.S.S.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026 registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, should be released on anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted: the petitioner is to be released, in the event of her arrest or surrender within six weeks, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- 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 Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) B.N.S.S.

Ratio / Principle

The grant of anticipatory bail rests on the Court's consideration of counsel's submissions and the fact that the petitioner is a woman.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted to a woman petitioner arraigned in Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026 (District Patna) for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. Taking into account the submissions of counsel and that the petitioner is a woman, the Court (Satyavrat Verma, J.) directed her release, in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks, on a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. Background per counsel: informant alleged theft of her goats; Mehi Lal Manjhi allegedly assaulted her by rod causing head injury requiring seven stitches; petitioner alleged to have caught the informant's hand; petitioner claims false implication as wife of Mehi Lal Manjhi and discloses one prior antecedent.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49843 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2026 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna

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

Munakiya Devi W/o Mehi Lal Manjhi Resident of Village - Ainkhan, P.S - Dulhin Bazar, District - Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ramanuj Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Prasad Singh ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 29-07-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and is a woman and the informant alleges that her goats were stolen, thus informant was abusing when Mehi Lal Manjhi assaulted her by rod causing injury on head and petitioner caught her hand and thereafter her husband (Mehi Lal Manjhi) assaulted the informant causing injury on head requiring seven stitches.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49843 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026 2/2

petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case being wife of Mehi Lal Manjhi. It is further submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the allegation against the petitioner is of assaulting the informant on hand i.e. a non-vital part of the body.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is a woman, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

vikram/-

U T