Patna High Court
Sudhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioners.
Summary
Sudhir Kumar and Nilam Devi, parents of the main accused Randhir Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging they were accomplices in a fraud of Rs. 20 lakh involving false promises of marriage, under Sections 69, 318, 318(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution claimed the money was transferred into the petitioners' accounts, while the petitioners argued they were elderly, unaware of any money transfer, and had no knowledge of the informant. The State opposed bail, asserting the petitioners were active participants in the deception. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found the allegations sufficient to consider the petitioners as accomplices and declined to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petitioners' application for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the allegations of fraud and accomplice liability under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318, 318(2), 61, 69
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- fraud
- false promise of marriage
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- accomplice liability
- money laundering
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29258 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2026 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
1. Sudhir Kumar S/O Late Ram Gulam Singh Resident of -Moldiyar Tola,
Chairman Road, ward No.- 10, PO and PS - Mokama, Patna - 803302
(Bihar)
2. Nilam Devi W/O Sudhir Kumar Resident of -Moldiyar Tola, Chairman
Road, ward No.- 10, PO and PS - Mokama, Patna - 803302 (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anand Kumar Tiwari, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026 lodged
on 14.01.2026, for the offence punishable under Sections 69,
318, 318(2) & 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
four named accused persons including the present petitioners
with allegation that the accused persons in collusion with each
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29258 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
other have deceived the informant with false promise of
marriage and also committed fraud of Rs. 20 lakhs from the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel submits that the petitioners are old aged persons and
they were completely unaware about the alleged money transfer
as mentioned in the FIR. Counsel submits that the petitioners
and the informant are unknown to each other. Counsel submits
that the present petitioners are parents of main accused Randhir
Kumar. He further submits that the petitioners have one criminal
antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners and submits that in the rejection order, it
has been acknowledged by the Exclusive Special Judge that
these petitioners are accomplice in the entire incident wherein
the main accused deceived the victim on the pretext of marriage
and established sexual intercourse and then duped the victim of
her money. The misappropriated money were also transferred
into the accounts of these petitioners.
6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29258 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners stand rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.