Patna High Court
Rintu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the marriage was duly performed and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rintu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest for offences under several sections of the BNS and the D.P. Act arising from a case registered at Chhaurahi Police Station. He alleged that his relationship with the informant was based on a promise of marriage, but claimed the marriage was not solemnized according to Hindu rites and was forced within the police station premises. The opposite party contended that the marriage was duly performed in a temple located on the police station premises with all rituals observed. The court examined the records and found that the marriage had indeed been performed in accordance with the applicable rites. Consequently, the court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail and rejected his application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail for the alleged offences under the BNS and D.P. Act.
- Whether the marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party was valid under Hindu law.
- Whether the alleged forced marriage at the police station premises affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- marriage validity
- Hindu rites
- criminal procedure
- BNS
- D.P. Act
- sections 126,115,85,109,352,351,3,4
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16667 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2024 Thana- Chhaudahi District- Begusarai
======================================================
Rintu Kumar Son of Shayam Narayan Mahto Resident of Village - Patla
Amari, Ward No.12, P.S. - Chhuaurahi, District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rani Chandra Prabha @ Shabnam Daughter of Jageshwar Prasad Resident
of Village - Khadiaahi Ward No.04, P.S. - Bibhutipur, District - Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sharda Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
7 19-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences
alleged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 109, 352, 351(3) and
3(5) of the BNS and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act, registered in
connection with Chhaurahi P.S.Case No. 119 of 2024.
3. As per allegation, the petitioner established
physical relationship with the informant on the assurance of
marriage.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the marriage was not solemnized according to Hindu rites
and customs, but was solemnized forcibly in the premises of the
police station which is not acceptable to him.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16667 of 2025(7) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
5. On the contrary, the learned counsel for o.p.no.2
submits that the marriage was solemnized in a temple, situated
in Bibhutipur police station premises and the rituals were
performed. The counsel for the o.p.no.2 also submits that had
the marriage been solemnized forcibly, the petitioner would
have reported the entire episode to the higher authorities of the
police.
6. Taking into account the entire aspect of the matter,
especially the fact that the marriage of the petitioner with the
o.p.no.2 has duly been performed, as per recitals available on
the record, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of
anticipatory bail which is hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
HR/-
U T
Checking your session…