Patna High Court
Shobha Kumari @ Sobha KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioners, who are family members of a woman alleged to have been coerced into marriage by Rahul Kumar, feared arrest in connection with FIR No.118 of 2026 filed under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code. They sought anticipatory bail, asserting that they have no criminal antecedent and are willing to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, contending that the relationship between Rahul and the complainant was not recognized and that the FIR arose from alleged abuse and assault. The Court noted the petitioners’ clean record, their familial relationship to the alleged victim, and the undertaking to cooperate, and therefore inclined to grant anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions. The order directed that, upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, each petitioner must furnish bail of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and comply with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., including appearance before the trial court and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code despite the serious nature of the offences alleged in the FIR.
- Whether the petitioners’ familial relationship to the alleged victim and lack of criminal antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on the anticipatory bail to ensure cooperation with the investigation and prevent tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure Code
- FIR
- family members
- bail conditions
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37690 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2026 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
1. Shobha Kumari @ Sobha Kumari S/O Binay Mandal @ Binay Kumar
Mandal R/O Village- Khuthari, P. S. - Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
2. Guriya Kumari D/O- Binay Mandal @ Binay Kumar Mandal R/O Village-
Khuthari, P. S. - Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
3. Rakesh Kumar @ Chunna Munna S/O- Shaligram Mandal R/O Village-
Khuthari, P. S. - Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
4. Binay Mandal @ Binay Kumar Mandal S/O- Late Sahdeo Mandal. R/O
Village- Khuthari, P. S. - Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ruchi Kumari D/O- Mukesh Kumar R/O- Jaanmohammadpur, P. S.
Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Meena Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 01-07-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Kahalgaon P.S. Case No. 118 of 2026 for the offence
registered under sections 69, 303(2), 115(2), 238, 324(4),
351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the accused, Rahul Kumar coerced her to solemnize
marriage and establish physical relationship. Further, on his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37690 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
2/4
instance, she left the home along with some cash amount and
went to her friend’s house. Allegation is that later, Tara Kumari
snatched her phone and smashed it to destroy all evidence
relating to her with Rahul. Later, when her relatives took her to
the Rahul’s house, they were abused/assaulted. Dial 112 was
called when Rahul accepted her as his wife but shortly after the
Police left, once again they resorted to the same story. This led
to the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that a
perusal of the FIR would show that two major persons
consented to relationship and allegedly solemnized marriage.
These petitioners are family members inasmuch as, while the
petitioner no. 1 is a married sister, petitioner no. 2, the
unmarried sister, petitioner no. 3 is the cousin as also petitioner
no. 4 is the father. Further, they are ready to co-operate in the
investigation.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand,
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that they
failed to recognize the relationship between Rahul and the lady
and this led to abuse/ assault and the FIR.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the averment made that Rahul is in custody, they are the family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37690 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
3/4
members including the married sister/ unmarried sister, an
undertaking has been given that they shall be diligently co-
operating in the investigation, none have criminal antecedent, in
that background, this Court is inclined to grant them the
anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioners in the event of arrest or
surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of the order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of
CJM, Bhagalpur in connection with Kahalgaon P.S. Case No.
118 of 2026 subject to condition as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
members/relatives of the petitioners, who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID)
to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail
bond by the Trial court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37690 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.