Patna High Court

OM PRAKASH KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to the stipulated conditions.

Summary

Om Prakash Kumar, the petitioner, feared arrest in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 323, 498A, 406, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act. He alleged that his wife, Sunidhi Kumari, had falsely implicated him and was simultaneously pursuing a divorce (Divorce Case No. 29 of 2024). The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the marital relationship had not irretrievably broken down and that the allegations were baseless. The court noted the pending divorce and the petitioner’s claim of false implication, and consequently granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order effectively released the petitioner from immediate arrest while the criminal proceedings continue.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending criminal case.
Whether the alleged false implication by the wife affects the grant of bail.
Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are appropriate.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
D.P. Act — s. 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 406, 498A, 504, 506/34

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false implication
divorce
IPC offences
Criminal Procedure Code
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71940 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-540 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                         Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 OM PRAKASH KUMAR, S/o- Late Ram Bilas Prajapati Resident of Village-
                 Shahpur P.O- Telari Police Station- Chenari District-Rohtas
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Sunidhi Kumari, W/o- Om Prakash Kumar, D/o- Ramji Prajapati R/v-
                  Jamuhara Po- Indrapuri Ps- Tillauthu Dist- Rohtas
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mrs. Asha Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323,

                   498(A), 406, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as

                   Section 4 of the D.P. Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner being the husband has been falsely implicated in the

                   instant case by the O.P. No. 2. It is further submitted that

                   relationship in between the petitioner and the O.P. No. 2 had not

                   deteriorated to an extent where it was not possible to revive the

                   conjugal relationship but then O.P. No. 2 was in a hurry and

                   filed a divorce case seeking divorce from the petitioner. It is
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71940 of 2025(3) dt.16-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      further submitted that O.P. No. 2 for reasons best known does

                      not intend to continue with the marriage.

                                   4. Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 is not in a

                      position to rebut the submission of the learned for the petitioner

                      that O.P. No. 2 has filed a divorce case being Divorce Case No.

                      29 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Principal Judge,

                      Family Court, Rohtas at Sasaram.

                                   5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it

                      appears that divorce case has been filed on behalf of O.P. No. 2,

                      as she does not intend to continue with the marriage, let the

                      petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender

                      within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

                      anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees

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

                      satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is

                      pending/Successor Court in connection with Complaint Case

                      No. 540 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                      Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.


                                                (Satyavrat Verma, J)
khushbu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…