Aman Kumar @ Aman Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25092 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-652 Year-2023 Thana- NALANDA COMPLAINT CASE District- Nalanda ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Aman Raj son of Late Ramji Prasad Resident of villagePreman Bigha, P.S-Nagarnausa, Dist-Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajni Kumar wife of Aman Kumar @ Aman Raj Resident of villagePreman Bigha, P.S-Nagarnausa, Dist-Nalanda at present resident of mohRamchandrapur, Near Fish Market, Biharsharif, P.S-Laheri, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant and Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 652 (c) of 2023 for the offences punishable under Section 498(A), 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the typed complaint letter of complainant Rajni Kumari, the matter is that the complainant was married to Aman Kumar alias Aman Raj according to Hindu customs on 07.10.22 at Budhwa Mahadev Temple Hilsa. After that the complainant started living a married life with her husband in

2/4 village Premnabigha. Aman Kumar alias Aman Raj had earlier sexually exploited the complainant for about ten days by luring her with marriage, for which the complainant had lodged Mahila Thana Case No. 116/21. He agreed to marry the complainant to get bail in the said case. Aman Kumar got bail after filing a reconciliation application on 27.07.22. After marriage, the complainant's husband and his family members started demanding dowry of five lakh rupees and started harassing her for the demand. The complainant's husband used to call his friends and insult the complainant in front of her. Panchayat was held on 17.02.23 in which both agreed to live well. Aman Kumar took his wife to his sister's house in Delhi, where he made her work like a servant. In May 2023, he brought her back to Premnibigha. On 13.06.23, the complainant came to know that she was going to have a child. The complainant's husband advised her not to have a child. When she did not follow the advice, the complainant was beaten up.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the complainant had filed a complaint case in Nalanda Mahila P.S. Case No. 116 of 2021 for the same set of allegation as mentioned in present complaint case no. 652 (c) of 2023. Pursuant to direction to this Court bring back the OP No. 2 but

3/4 when the petitioner has reached the address as mentioned in the complaint petition, the OP No. 2 was not available there.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant fairly submits that the complainant (OP No. 2) she is living in a separate house at Hilsa and on instruction learned counsel for the complainant submits that she is not ready to live with the petitioner.

6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court has no other option but to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 J.M. 1st Class, Nalanda, Biharsharif in connection with Complaint Case No. 652 (c) of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and with other 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

4/4 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) Raj Ranjan/- U T