Sumit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16070 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-592 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - PATNA CITY District- Patna ====================================================== Sumit Kumar Son of Ram Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Pakri, P.S. - Karay (Parshuray), District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Juli Kumari Wife of Sumit Kumar, Daughter of Nagendra Singh Resident of Village - Pakri, P.S. - Karay (Parshuray), District - Nalanda. At present Resident of Village - Nizampur, P.S. - Didarganj, District - Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 16-09-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 592 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, lodged by the complainant Juli Kumari.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that she was married to the petitioner in the year 2017 but always tortured for dowry. Later, she got pregnant but had miscarriage. The father-in-law took initiative and took her back to the in-laws house, again became pregnant and blessed with a child. However, the dowry torture continued, she became pregnant for the third time but the torture led to abortion again. Later, came to know that husband has affair with another women and want to marry her, to the complainant's knowledge, he has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16070 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025 2/2 solemnized second marriage, this led to the present complaint.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence took place. It is a false allegation, though the abortion took place, he is not responsible for it, no such second marriage has taken place.

5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand on the instruction submits that not only the petitioner repeatedly ensured that the lady suffers at his hands, the fact remains that despite having joined the government post as a Teacher, he became greedy and just for the dowry, has solemnized second marriage with the daughter of Lalendra Singh.

6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the fact on record coupled with the fact that despite blessed with a child, though twice the lady suffered abortion, the petitioner being a responsible government teacher has solemnized second marriage as informed by the learned counsel for the informant, it would be appropriate that he seek bail.

7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T