Bablu Kumar @ Babi KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32542 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-510 Year-2025 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Bablu Kumar @ Babi Kumar S/O Sri Narayan Ram R/O Village- Mahuli,
                 Punpun, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, Dist.- Patna.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Rubi Kumari W/O Late Matindra Kumar R/O Village- Mahuli, Punpun, P.S.-
                 Parsa Bazar, Distt.- Patna.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Dinkar Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
                 For the informant        :      Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-05-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

                   Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 510 of 2025 dated 09.12.2025,

                   instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 303(2),

                   324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section ¾ of

                   the Dowry Prohibition Act.

                                3. The prosecution case, in short, is that marriage of

                   the informant was solemnized with the petitioner after death of

                   her first husband. It is further alleged that on 02.12.2025, the

                   petitioner entered in the house of first husband of the informant

                   and assaulted the informant and his son and insisted to transfer
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32542 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                            2/3




          the property in his name. It is also alleged that the petitioner

          took away Rs. 50,000/-, gold chain and ornaments from the

          informant.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this

          case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not the husband

          of     the     informant,        rather,      the    petitioner   is   still

          bachelor/unmarried. Learned counsel further submitted that the

          husband of the informant died on 10.03.2023 leaving behind his

          wife (informant) and two children and since then the informant

          wants to marry the petitioner and when the petitioner refused,

          then the present false and fabricated case has been lodged

          against him. Lastly, it has been submitted that petitioner has no

          criminal antecedents.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the

          informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          petitioner and submitted that the petitioner has solemnized

          marriage with the informant which is evident from the

          certificate issued under Special Marriage Act, 1954 bearing

          Certificate No. 39/2025 on 14.08.2025.

                       6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

          the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties and
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32542 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                        3/3




                      taking into consideration that the marriage of the informant was

                      solemnized with the petitioner, I am not inclined to extend the

                      privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                                   7. Accordingly, the prayer of petitioner for grant of

                      anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.



                                                   (Khatim Reza, J)
Sankalp/-

U      T