Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30268 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2026 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Prasad Singh S/o Late Ram Gulam Singh Resident of Moldiyar Tola, Chairman Road, ward No 10, PO and PSMokama, Dist.- Patna 2.
Nilam Devi W/o Sudhir Kumar Resident of Moldiyar Tola, Chairman Road, ward No 10, PO and PS- Mokama, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Harshit Ranjan, Advocate Mr.Anand Kumar Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections 69, 318, 318(2), 61 of B.N.S.
3. As per prosecution case, co-accused Randhir Kumar claiming himself to be a divorced person, giving inducement of marriage to the informant, a divorced lady entered into frequent sexual intercourse with her and continued
2/4 this relation for sometime. Meanwhile, he also cheated the informant Rs.Six lakh. The allegation against the petitioners, who are parents of co-accused Randhir Kumar, is that petitioner no. 1 made a call to the father of the informant giving a proposal of marriage of his son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. From the story made in the written report leading to registration of FIR, it is not believable that the petitioner no. 1 gave any proposal of marriage to the father of the informant as no details have been mentioned. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused son of the petitioners has been working as Assistant Manager in State Bank of India, Mokama Branch and he has taken loan from a number of persons and invested the money in share market. Now the persons, who have lent the money, are torturing the petitioners for return of the money though the petitioners have broken all relationship with their co-accused son, who has been absconding for last two years. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are not even aware of whereabout of their co-accused son. The falsity of allegation is also apparent from the fact that though there is no allegation against petitioner no. 2, still being the
3/4 mother of the co-accused, she has been roped in the present case. The petitioners were having clean antecedent, however Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026 has been instituted on the same day, i.e., 14.01.2026 making similar type of allegation.
5. Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioners.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the peculiarity of the case and possibility of false accusation, let the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna/concerned court in connection with Patna Mahila P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the
4/4 court below, if so required by the learned trial court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T