Sona KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42664 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2026 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai
                 ======================================================
                 Sona Kumar S/o Late Sanjeet Kumar Sinha @ Sanjeev Kumar Resident of
                 Village- Baghi, Ward No. 25, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Begusarai

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
                                          :      Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
                                          :      Mr. Mudit Meet, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-07-2026                      Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner as well as Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   21.04.2026 in connection with Town P.S. Case No.189 of 2026,

                   F.I.R. dated 19.04.2026 for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 61(2), 143(2), 144(2)of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,

                   2023 and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6,7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention

                   Act, 1956.

                                3. According to the prosecution case, it is alleged that

                   prostitution was being carried on at Ganpati Hotel, located near

                   Subhash Chowk, and that the petitioner was serving as the

                   manager of the said hotel.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42664 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
                                            2/3




                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

          implicated in the present case merely on the ground that

          petitioner is the manager of the hotel in question but the

          petitioner has no role at all in the present occurrence. He further

          submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge

          sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since

          21.04.2026.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been implicated in the

          present case merely on the ground that petitioner is the manager

          of the hotel in question, let the petitioner, above named, be

          released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

          Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai

          in connection with Town P.S. Case No.189 of 2026, subject to

          the following conditions:-

                        i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42664 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                      and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                      on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                      reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                   ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                      witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                      move for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T