Patna High Court
SHARVAN RAM @ SHARVAN KUMAR @ SHARWAN KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and conditions, finding insufficient grounds to deny bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Sharvan Ram, was implicated in a FIR (Sarai P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024) alleging sexual exploitation, blackmail, and assault under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He applied for pre‑arrest bail, contending that the relationship with the complainant was consensual for over six years and that the complainant’s statements contained contradictions, with no material evidence such as videos or photographs. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the accusations and the complainant’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The Court examined the long consensual history, the lack of prior complaints, the contradictions highlighted by the petitioner, and his clean antecedent. Considering these factors, the Court granted the petitioner bail subject to a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also stipulated that bail could be cancelled if the petitioner intimidates the complainant or witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to the petitioner despite allegations under Sections 126, 115, 69, 303 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the contradictions between the FIR report and the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS affect the merit of the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the alleged consensual nature of the relationship justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 183, 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115, 126, 303, 3(5), 69
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- sexual exploitation
- consensual relationship
- contradictory statements
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48539 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2024 Thana- SARAI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sharvan Ram @ Sharvan Kumar @ Sharwan Kumar, S/o- Devendra Ram,
Village- Boaria, Ps- Sarai, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Suman Kumari D/o- Madan Sahani Village- Boaria Ps- Sarai Dist- Vaishali
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Ray, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratanakar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sarai P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 126, 115, 69, 303 and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Based upon the written report the prosecution
alleges that on account of pretext of marriage, the informant was
subjected to sexual exploitation for six years and the marriage
was also solemnized in a temple, but later on, the petitioner left
the informant and also abused and assaulted. Despite the
persuasion made by the local people, the dispute could not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48539 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
resolved and, as such, the informant lodged the present FIR.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner taking this Court through the FIR contended that
admittedly there was a long consensual relationship between the
parties and the informant is a major adult woman, knowing
every aspect of the matter had entered into the relationship,
however, due to some unforeseen reason, the marriage could not
be performed and this infuriated the informant, which led to
filing of the present FIR. It is further contended that the
statement of the victim was also recorded, however there is
various contradictions in the written report vis-a-vis the
statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita. He further submits that so far the allegation
with regard to putting pressure and blackmailing based upon
some viral videos and indecent photographs, that has not been
supported during the course of investigation, as no materials
have been collected in this regard. The petitioner is a man of fair
antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully cooperate in the
proceeding of the Court
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits
that there is a specific accusation against the petitioner of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48539 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
causing sexual exploitation of a innocent woman, besides she
also stated in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS
that she was subjected to blackmail and forced physical
relationship.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the fact that there was a long consensual relationship for over
six years and in the mean time, the informant had never made
any complaint, besides the contradictions pointed out by the
learned Advocate for the petitioner in the written report vis-a-vis
the statement of the victim, coupled with the fair antecedent of
the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail,
in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below
within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur or his successor in connection
with Sarai P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024, subject to the condition as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further
following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors shall be the own/close family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48539 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
members of the petitioner.
(ii) If the petitioner is found indulged in intimidating
or threatening the informant and the witnesses, they shall be at
liberty to file cancellation of his bail bond.
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U T
Checking your session…