Patna High Court
Amarjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the alleged conduct was consensual and does not warrant denial of bail under the applicable statutes.
Summary
The petitioner, Amarjeet Kumar, sought bail after a complaint was lodged alleging that he had a physical relationship with the complainant under the false pretext of marriage, leading to a pregnancy that was terminated at the behest of his family. The FIR charged him under sections 64 and 88 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual, he had no prior criminal record, and the complaint was filed five years after the relationship began. The State and the complainant opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner had deceived the complainant and was about to marry another woman. The court, noting the consensual nature of the alleged relationship and the lack of a prima facie case for a non‑bailable offence, ordered bail on a bond of ₹30,000 subject to conditions under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail for offences under sections 64 and 88 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the allegations constitute a non‑bailable offence.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 2(1)(d), 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 64, 88
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- consensual relationship
- sections 64 and 88
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7622 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Amarjeet Kumar S/O Dinesh Patel Resident of Village- Manjhagarh, Nayi
Bajar Police Station- Manjharagarh, District- Gopalganj, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rahul Kumar Dubey, Advocate
Mr.Shashi Ranjan Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
For O. P. No.2 : Mr. Radhesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
4 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2.
2. The petitioner who apprehends arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No. 1024 of 2025 later on registered as
Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 304 of 2025 lodged on 23.08.2025,
for the offences punishable under sections 64 and 88 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. It is alleged in the FIR that the petitioner
established a physical relationship with Opposite Party No. 2 on
the false pretext of marriage. It is further alleged that when
Opposite Party No. 2 became pregnant, her pregnancy was
terminated at the instance of the petitioner’s family members,
and thereafter she was ousted from the petitioner’s house.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7622 of 2026(4) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further
submitted that the petitioner has a clean antecedent. From the
allegations made in the FIR, it is evident that both the petitioner
and the complainant were well acquainted with each other and
had been in a relationship since the year 2020; however, the
present complaint has been lodged only in the year 2025. It is
also submitted that from the contents of the FIR as well as the
statement of the complainant recorded under Section 183 of the
BNSS, 2023, it clearly transpires that the relationship between
the parties was consensual.
5. Learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.
2 vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the
petitioner developed physical relationship with the complainant
on the pretext of marriage but subsequently refused to marry her
and is now proceeding to solemnize marriage with another
woman.
6. Learned APP for the State also opposes the prayer
for bail; however, he fairly submits that, from the allegations, it
appears that the physical relationship between the petitioner and
the complainant was consensual.
7. In the facts and circumstances, let the above named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7622 of 2026(4) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
petitioner be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the Trial Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on furnishing bail bond of ₹30000/- (thirty thousand) as
mentioned in Section 2(1) (d) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Gopalganj,
in connection with the aforementioned case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U T
Checking your session…