Pappu Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15469 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Pappu Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Kumar S/O Sudama Yadav Resident of Village- Bhagwanpur Kedera, P.S.- Khawaspur (O.P.), Barhara, DistrictBhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 105 of 2024, for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the accusation against the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including the petitioner, is of harassing and torturing the informant for dowry. Further allegation of assault and making an attempt to commit rape upon the informant were also made against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that prior to this case informant has lodged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15469 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 several false cases against her husband and his family. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that other co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Bench vide order dated 15.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43713 of 2025. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Specific allegation of assault and committing rape upon the informant is against the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T