Patna High Court
Ashwani Kumar @ Uttam @ Uttam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the DNA report excluded the petitioner as the biological father, indicating false implication, and therefore granted anticipatory bail.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered the petition of Ashwani Kumar (Uttam Kumar) seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 69, 89, 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita based on allegations by an informant of a long‑term relationship, false promise of marriage and fathering a child. The informant obtained a court‑ordered DNA test to establish paternity. The DNA report, opened in court, conclusively showed that the petitioner’s blood sample was excluded as the biological father of the child. The petitioner’s counsel argued that this demonstrated false implication, and the informant could not rebut the finding. Relying on the DNA evidence and the need to prevent unwarranted arrest, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds and two sureties under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, and dispensed with the personal appearance of the investigating officers.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail in view of DNA evidence excluding him as the biological father
- Whether the allegations under Sections 69, 89, 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNSS can be sustained against the petitioner
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2), 69, 89
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- DNA test
- paternity
- false accusation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- Section 352
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87961 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Nalanda
======================================================
Ashwani Kumar @ Uttam @ Uttam Kumar S/o Ashok Kumar Tanti R/o
Mohalla - Paharpura, P.S - Biharsharif, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vivekanand Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 30-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 89, 126 (2), 115 (2),
352, 351 (2) and 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The S.H.O and the Investigating Officer of the case in
compliance of the order dated 02.02.2026 are present in the court
along with DNA report. The DNA report was submitted to the court
in a sealed cover and the same was opened in presence of the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the
State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is a person with a clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that she was married to Munna and 8-9 years after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87961 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026
2/4
her marriage with Munna they obtained a divorce by mutual consent
and thereafter informant started living at her parental home where
petitioner met her in the year 2017 and on false promise of marriage
established physical relation, further in the year 2017 the petitioner
got employed at Pune as an engineer and when informant asked him
to marry, the petitioner said that he will marry her after the marriage
of his elder brother and sister. The informant next alleges that she
became pregnant in the year 2020 but pregnancy was aborted and
again became pregnant in the year 2024 and gave birth to a girl child
but petitioner refused to marry and married Varsha, thus alleges that
the petitioner on false promise of marriage exploited her physically
for 7-8 years on account of which a child was also born.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that the informant before the learned
District Court had filed an application for a DNA test of the child
with the petitioner and the same was allowed and a DNA Test was
conducted. Accordingly, when the case was taken up on 02.02.2026,
the S.H.O and the Investigating Officer of the case were directed to
remain physically present before the court on 30.03.2026 in the event
if DNA report is not obtained but then it is submitted that the S.H.O
and the investigating Officer of the case are present in the court along
with the DNA report.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that since the DNA
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87961 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026
3/4
report was handed over to the S.H.O today itself at 12.15 P.M as such
they appeared before the court along with the report.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel
for the informant along with the learned counsel for the A.P.P have
perused the DNA report.
8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that from perusal of the conclusion recorded in the DNA
report it would manifest that the same records - on the basis of above
observation it is sufficient to conclude that- (i) The source of exhibit
marked- B/I (source- blood sample of Aswhani Kumar @ Uttam
Kumar) is excluded as the biological father of the source of exhibit
marked A/I (source- blood sample of Janhavi Kumari). The learned
counsel for the petitioner thus submits that this amply demonstrates
that how the petitioner was falsely implicated in the instant case with
the aforesaid allegation as recorded hereinabove.
9. Learned counsel on behalf of the informant is not in a
position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner.
10. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the DNA report dated 29.03.2026 contained
in letter no. 1194/FSL60842/DN/800054/26 dated 30.03.2026, 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. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87961 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026
4/4
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 Nalanda Mahila P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
11. The DNA report is hereby returned to the S.H.O in the
presence of I.O who are present in the court.
12. The personal appearance of the S.H.O and the
investigating officer of the case is dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.