Patna High Court
Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Prasad SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners, holding that the allegations were insufficient to justify their arrest and that bail was appropriate under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Sudhir Kumar and Nilam Devi, parents of accused Randhir Kumar, filed a petition fearing arrest in a case (Mahila P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 69, 318, 318(2) and 61 of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners facilitated a marriage proposal for their son, who allegedly defrauded a woman of Rs. six lakh. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, had no knowledge of their son’s whereabouts, and were being harassed by creditors of the son. The court examined the possibility of false accusation and the lack of concrete evidence linking the petitioners to the alleged offences. Considering these factors, the court ordered that the petitioners be released on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 each, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., including attendance in court as required.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners can be arrested in connection with the offences alleged under Sections 69, 318, 318(2) and 61 of the B.N.S.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioners constitute a false accusation warranting bail.
- Whether bail should be granted subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 318, 318(2), 482(2), 61, 69
Subjects
- bail
- false accusation
- marital fraud
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30268 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2026 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
1. Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Prasad Singh S/o Late Ram Gulam
Singh Resident of Moldiyar Tola, Chairman Road, ward No 10, PO and PS-
Mokama, Dist.- Patna
2. Nilam Devi W/o Sudhir Kumar Resident of Moldiyar Tola, Chairman Road,
ward No 10, PO and PS- Mokama, Dist.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harshit Ranjan, Advocate
Mr.Anand Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioners are
apprehending their arrest in connection with Patna Mahila P.S.
Case No. 08 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections
69, 318, 318(2), 61 of B.N.S.
3. As per prosecution case, co-accused Randhir
Kumar claiming himself to be a divorced person, giving
inducement of marriage to the informant, a divorced lady
entered into frequent sexual intercourse with her and continued
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30268 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/4
this relation for sometime. Meanwhile, he also cheated the
informant Rs.Six lakh. The allegation against the petitioners,
who are parents of co-accused Randhir Kumar, is that petitioner
no. 1 made a call to the father of the informant giving a proposal
of marriage of his son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in
this case. From the story made in the written report leading to
registration of FIR, it is not believable that the petitioner no. 1
gave any proposal of marriage to the father of the informant as
no details have been mentioned. Learned counsel further
submits that the co-accused son of the petitioners has been
working as Assistant Manager in State Bank of India, Mokama
Branch and he has taken loan from a number of persons and
invested the money in share market. Now the persons, who have
lent the money, are torturing the petitioners for return of the
money though the petitioners have broken all relationship with
their co-accused son, who has been absconding for last two
years. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are
not even aware of whereabout of their co-accused son. The
falsity of allegation is also apparent from the fact that though
there is no allegation against petitioner no. 2, still being the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30268 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/4
mother of the co-accused, she has been roped in the present
case. The petitioners were having clean antecedent, however
Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026 has been instituted on
the same day, i.e., 14.01.2026 making similar type of allegation.
5. Learned APP opposes the submission made on
behalf of the petitioners.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
peculiarity of the case and possibility of false accusation, let the
petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender
before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from
today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial
Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna/concerned court in connection with
Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, subject to the condition
as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other
following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present
on each and every date fixed by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30268 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
4/4
court below, if so required by the
learned trial court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.