Monu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19466 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-478 Year-2025 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas ====================================================== Monu Singh Son of Uday Singh Resident of Village- Kundesar, P S- Shahpur, District -Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhu Prasun, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate Mr. Aditya Kr. Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-03-2026 Heard Mr. Madhu Prasun, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 19.11.2025 in connection with Dehri (Town) P.S. Case No. 478 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 77, 64, 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, on the pretext of marriage this petitioner has made physical relationship with the informant and also took her photographs and videos without her consent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19466 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026 2/3 present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. From perusal of the FIR it appears that the informant herself has stated in the FIR that she has made physical relationship with the petitioner and when this petitioner refused to perform marriage with her then she has lodged the present FIR. In fact, the petitioner is a married person and he has not committed anything with the informant. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025.

5. The learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has misused the trust of the informant and apart from that the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19466 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026 3/3 Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Dehri (Town) P.S. Case No. 478 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T