Surendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72104 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2025 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Surendra Kumar S/O Ramashish Bind R/O Village- Samhuta, P.S.- Shivsagar,
                 District- Rohtas

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Patna
           2.    Nisha Kumari Daughter of Babua Bind Resident of Village- Alampur, P.S.-
                 Baddi, Rohtas

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Parmanand Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   21-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

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

                                2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered

                   for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2),

                   3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

                                3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean

                   antecedent, it is next submitted that elder sister of the informant

                   is married to the elder brother of the petitioner, as such

                   informant is own sister-in-law of the elder brother of the

                   informant and the informant alleges that his sister was married

                   to Yamuna Prasad in the year 2011, the informant used to visit
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72104 of 2025(3) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/4




          her sister, when she came to contact with the petitioner and

          petitioner on false pretext of marriage for the last 4 years was

          establishing physical relation, when her parents came to know

          about the relationship, the informant pressurize the petitioner to

          marry her, further the petitioner married the informant in a

          temple and also performed court marriage on 29.04.2025 at

          Sasaram and took her to his house where she stayed but after 2-

          3 days, the accused person started demanding Rs. 5 lakhs by

          way of dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of demand, she

          was ousted from her matrimonial home.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in

          the instant case by the informant, it is asserted and submitted

          that the petitioner never solemnized marriage with informant

          either in a temple nor court marriage was performed.

                       5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of the informant submits that the petitioner and the

          informant preformed their marriage in presence of Notary but

          then fairly submits that it was not a Court marriage.

                       6. The learned counsel for the petitioner next submits

          that petitioner and informant were known to each other but the

          petitioner had never given any assurance to marry the informant,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72104 of 2025(3) dt.21-04-2026
                                            3/4




          it is also also submitted that the informant herself alleges that

          there was a relationship for the last four years, as such, it does

          not appear probable that informant in these 4 years would not

          have realised that petitioner does not intend to marry her which

          amply demonstrate that they were in a consensual relationship,

          it is also submitted that the parents of the informant were

          pressursing his brother to get the informant married with the

          petitioner but the petitioner was not ready. It is next submitted

          that even presuming what has been alleged is true without

          admitting then the relationship was in between the two

          consenting adults, it is also submitted that the moment such

          relationship seems, a false case is instituted, it is further

          submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted the

          petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate

          in the investigation to prove his innocent.

                       7. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for

          the informant both oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

          petitioner but they are not a position to rebut the submission

          made by learned counsel for the petitioner that marriage of the

          petitioner with informant was not performed in a temple and

          that no court marriage ever took place.

                       8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72104 of 2025(3) dt.21-04-2026
                                                        4/4




                      of the case, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail

                      to the petitioner.

                                   9. Let the petitioner, as named above, in the event of

                      his arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be

                      enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees

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

                      satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at

                      Sasaram, in connection with Shivsagar P.S. Case No. 208 of

                      2025, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2)

                      of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the

                      Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                                                           (Satyavrat Verma, J)
sanjeev/-

U       T