Patna High Court
Anukar Kumar Singh @ Anukar Kr. SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
In the absence of any ingredient of Section 85 of the BNSS, the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
Anukar Kumar Singh applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85 and 351(2) of the Bihar Negotiable (BNSS) for alleged dowry demand and assault after marriage. The FIR alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, demanded dowry and threatened the informant. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, that the informant was from Uttarakhand and was already involved with another person, and that no element of Section 85 (the BNSS counterpart of IPC 498) was present. The State opposed the bail. The court, after examining the FIR, found that the essential ingredient of Section 85 was absent and therefore the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for pre‑arrest bail. Accordingly, the court directed his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite allegations under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85 and 351(2) of the BNSS.
- Whether the ingredients of Section 85 of the BNSS, corresponding to IPC Section 498, are made out against the petitioner.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS for pre‑arrest bail are satisfied.
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- dowry harassment
- Section 85
- Section 498 IPC
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- marital dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.387 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2025 Thana- PANJWARA District- Banka
======================================================
Anukar Kumar Singh @ Anukar Kr. Singh Son of Prabhakar Singh R/o
Village, Lakhpura, P.S. - Panjwara, District - Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Puja W/o Anukar Kumar Singh @ Anukar Kr. Singh, D/o Shambhu Singh,
permanent R/o Village - Lakhpura, P.S. - Panjwara, Dist. - Banka and
presently R/o Ward no. 3, Old Awas Vikash, Kashipur, Uddham Singh
Nager, Uttrakhand.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravish Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ravish Mishra, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Panjwara P.S. Case No. 46/2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2),115(2),85,351(2) of
the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant’s marriage was solemnized with the petitioner on
05.10.2024 in a temple. After one month of marriage, the
petitioner along with other co-accused persons started
demanding dowry from her and also assaulted her and told her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.387 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
to go back, otherwise they would kill her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Petitioner has given correct
information in paragraphs no.7 and 8 that the informant belongs
to Uttrahkand and she is engaged with other boy, who is also
resident of Uttrahkhand and after getting such information, the
petitioner has found it better not to continue with such
relationship. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no
allegation of having subjected the informant to any kind of
cruelty, leading the informant to commit suicide. In absence of
any ingredient of Section 85 of BNSS corresponding to Section
498 of IPC, petitioner, who is having clean antecedent, deserves
to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well, having perused the allegation made in the
FIR, I find that in absence of any ingredient of Section 85 of
BNSS corresponding to Section 498 of IPC against the
petitioner, the petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.387 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka /
Concerned Court in connection with Panjwara P.S. Case No.
46/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found
that the petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what
has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application,
this order will automatically lose its force.
9. It is made clear that the parties are free to settle the
matter amicably, if they so desire.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…