Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.115 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Bittu Kumar S/O Binod Kumar Patel R/O Village- Kotwa, P.S- Kotwa, Distt.-
                 East Champaran.

                                                                                  ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Chhotan Kumari W/O Ramchandra Ram R/O Village- Semra Tola Panchayat
                 Raj Barharwa Kala, P.S- Kotwa, Distt.- East Champaran.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :         Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :         Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
                 For the Respondent No.2:         Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Ronit Ranjan, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   25-06-2026                   Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   appellant, Mr. Prateek Tandon, learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. Binay Krishna

                   learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

                               2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against

                   refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 03.12.2025

                   passed by the learned Court of Special Judge, (SC/ST) Act, East

                   Champaran at Motihari in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.

                   98 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 18.09.2025 registered under Sections

                   68, 89, 126(2), 115(2), 352, 318(4), 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of

                   the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(i)(r)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the

                   Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.115 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
                                             2/4




          Atrocities) Act.

                       3. According to the prosecution case, the petitioner

          has established physical relationship with the victim on the

          pretext of marriage and also abused her by taking her caste

          name and also took Rs. 8 lakhs from her.

                       4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

          implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

          allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

          appellant has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

          He further submits that initially the victim has supported the

          case of the prosecution. He further submits that the trial has

          begun and the victim has deposed before the trial court as P.W.1

          in which she has categorically stated that she was living with the

          appellant in live-in-relationship and on the date of occurrence

          she was major and with her consent the appellant has establish

          physical relationship with her but when her parents came to the

          house of the appellant for their marriage, then the family

          members of the appellant have refused to perform their marriage

          and due to this reason the present FIR has been instituted

          against the appellant and his family members. He further

          submits that the police, after investigation, submitted charge
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.115 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
                                             3/4




          sheet against the appellant. The appellant is in custody since

          19.09.2025.

                       5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor

          for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          appellant and submits that the appellant has committed wrong

          with the victim.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case and taking into consideration the deposition of the

          victim, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

          Court of Special Judge, (SC/ST) Act, East Champaran at

          Motihari in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 98 of 2025,

          with other following conditions:-

                       i. Appellant 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                       ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the

          witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.115 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
                                                         4/4




                      move for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. 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.

                                   7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                      this appeal stands allowed.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-

U      T