Bablu SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6782 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2025 Thana- THAKRAHA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Bablu Sharma S/O Brij Kishor Sharma R/O Village- Bhualpati, Police
                 Station- Thakaraha, District- West Champaran.

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Rehna Khatoon w/o Jamir Ahmad, R/o Village Bhusa, Sasamusa P.S. Kuchai
                 Kod, District- Gopalganj

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Ravi Shankar Sahay, Sr. Advocate
                                                 Mr.Prerna Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
                 For the Informant        :      Mr.Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   05-05-2026                      Heard     Mr. Ravi Shankar Sahay, learned Senior

                   counsel along with Mr. Prerna Anand, learned counsel appearing

                   on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, learned

                   APP for the State, as well as Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned

                   counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection

                   with Thakraha P.S. Case No. 123/2025 registered for the

                   offence(s) punishable under Sections 69,351(2),352,3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

                                 3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the

                   informant has stated that she has been living separately from her

                   husband for the last four years pursuant to a panchayati
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6782 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
                                            2/4




          settlement. It is alleged that during this period, she developed

          healthy friendly relationship with the petitioner, who used to

          visit her village, and developed physical relationship with her on

          the assurance of marriage. It is further alleged that the petitioner

          had taken certain photographs and subsequently refused to

          marry her.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely

          been implicated in the present case. The relationship between

          the petitioner and the informant was through social media and

          the informant, who is already living separately from her

          husband, was pressurizing the petitioner for marriage, and upon

          refusal, the present case has been instituted. Learned counsel

          further submitted that even as per the materials collected during

          investigation, the parties were major and the relationship was

          consensual in nature and the informant being major was

          knowing the consequence of such relationship. The petitioner

          has clean antecedents. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to

          be released on pre-arrest bail.

                       5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

          informant submitted that the petitioner from the very beginning

          established a physical relationship with the informant on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6782 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
                                            3/4




          false pretext of marriage without disclosing his prior marriage

          and thereafter deserted her and as such, the petitioner don’t

          deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.

                       6. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the

          prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

                       7. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf

          of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in

          the FIR it appears that the dispute is arising out of a personal

          relationship between the parties, and it is admitted that the

          informant is a major and is already living separately from her

          husband. The materials on record also indicate that the element

          of coercion or inducement is not clearly made out, and the

          dispute appears to have arisen on account of refusal of marriage.

          The petitioner being major was knowing the consequence of

          such relationship. I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima

          facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.

                       8. 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 District Court where the case is pending /
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6782 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
                                                       4/4




                     Concerned Court in connection with Thakraha P.S. Case No.

                     123/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                     482(2) of the BNSS.

                                  9. 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.



                                               (Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-

U      T