Patna High Court
Shyam KediaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, surety, and other conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Shyam Kedia, sought anticipatory bail after a complaint was lodged alleging dowry demands, forced sexual intercourse, and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The informant, a purported executive of Indigo Airlines, claimed that her father paid a portion of a demanded dowry and that she was later assaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner’s father and others had previously obtained anticipatory bail in a related matter (Cr. Misc No. 18075 of 2026). The State did not oppose the present application, and the court, after considering the earlier order, granted anticipatory bail subject to bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order directs release on bail if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within six weeks, subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations of dowry demand and forced sexual intercourse.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are sufficient to justify anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 123, 316(2), 318(4), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 482(2), 64
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry prohibition
- forced sexual intercourse
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17815 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2025 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna
======================================================
Shyam Kedia son of Vinod Kumar Resident Of Village- 303 B, Jai
Maheshwari Complex, Exhibition Road, Ps- Phulwari, Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Saumya @ Nishi Daughter of Sudhir Kumar Resident of House No. 28, Veer
Shivaji Path, Ps- Sri Krishna Puri, Dist- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Avanish Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv
Mr. Amarendra Kumar, Adv
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 64,
316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that she is an Executive with Indigo Airlines, further
Ashit and Ankita met her father and a proposal was made for
marrying informant with Shyam, further the proposal was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17815 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
accepted and Ashit and Ankita requested her father that accused
persons would meet her, further the marriage was finalised and
engagement was performed on 18-5-2025 and she started
talking to Shyam, further Vinod came to her house and asked
her father to give Rs. 10 lakh for marriage expenses,
accordingly her father gave Rs. 6 lakh, next alleges that
marriage was fixed for 1-12-2025 and the venue was selected,
further on 15-8-2025, Ankita called her to her house from where
she took her to a restaurant on a car along with Shyam and Ashit
and they took lunch at Rare Window restaurant, S.K. Puri at
Patna, further alleges that she drank cold drink and became
senseless and thereafter they took her to Shyam’s house where
Shyam forcefully established physical relation, further her father
went to the house of Shyam, when Vinod demanded a four-
wheeler, on showing helplessness to the demand, the marriage
was broken.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits
that father of the petitioner (Vinod Kumar) and two others had
approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
Misc No. 18075 of 2026 and the same came to be allowed by an
order dated 7-5-2026 after considering the case on merits and in
detail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17815 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant does not oppose the said
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties in
details and taking into consideration the order dated 7-5-2026 in
Cr. Misc No. 18075 of 2026, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his 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 Sri Krishna Puri P.S. Case No. 287 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…