Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13937 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHARPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sonu Kumar S/o Sanjay Mandal @ Sanjay Kumar R/o Village - Madhuban Tola, P.S. - Bakharpur, District - Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Davendra Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 75, 126(2), 303(2), 329(4), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioner had committed wrong earlier and, on 29.03.2025, in absence of her parents acted inappropriately with her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that no doubt, the informant in the FIR alleges that petitioner earlier had committed wrong but

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13937 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026 2/3 then no FIR came to be instituted. It is next submitted that the instant FIR has been instituted with an allegation that in absence of her parents, the petitioner came and acted inappropriately. It is also submitted that petitioner and the informant are known to each other and the informant wanted to marry the petitioner. It is further submitted that from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that informant in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that she was to marry the petitioner but then petitioner was not ready to marry her. It is, thus, submitted that the instant FIR has been instituted only with a view to presurrize the petitioner to marry the informant. It is next submitted that if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner and the informant were known to each other and in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS the informant has stated that petitioner resiled from the marriage.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13937 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026 3/3

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, 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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Bakharpur P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T