Nand Kishore Mandal @ Nand Kishore Mandal @ Nand Kishore Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35734 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2026 Thana- BHAWANIPUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Nand Kishore Mandal @ Nand Kishore Mandal @ Nand Kishore Kumar S/o Bhim Mandal R/o Village- Parsmani, Ward No 05, PS- Bhawanipur, DisttPurnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghwendra Pratap Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP :

Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate :

Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhawanipur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2026, for allegedly having committed offence under Section 69 of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to the effect that while the informant was residing at the matrimonial home of her sister at Parasmani, the informant induced her and a relationship developed in between the

2/4 informant and the petitioner. They started talking to each other on mobile phone and on the pretext of marriage, the petitioner established physical relationship with the informant since 2021. The petitioner promised the informant that he will marry her and when the petitioner got job of Teacher in 2022 in Middle School Dargaha, even then he kept on having physical relationship with the informant. Subsequently, he denied to marry the informant. It is further alleged that the petitioner asked for dowry to the tune of Rs 50,00,000/- from the informant, for marrying her. The relationship between the informant and the petitioner continued till June 2025 and lastly, the petitioner stopped talking to the informant on 29.10.2025.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the relationship between the informant and the petitioner was consensual and there was no coercion or threat. In the First Information Report itself the informant had submitted that since 2021 to 2025, they were in physical relationship and the informant is a major. He further submits that the informant was putting pressure upon the petitioner to marry her, however on the refusal of the father of the petitioner to marry his son with the informant, the present First Information Report has been lodged. As per the informant herself, the relationship continued

3/4 from 2021 till 2025 June, however the First Information Report was lodged on 01.02.2026. He further submits that the petitioner has got a clean antecedent.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner took advantage of the relationship and established physical relationship with the informant in 2021, which continued till 2025 and since the petitioner got a job as a teacher, he did not marry the informant.

6. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State also opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner sexually exploited the informant for 4 years. He further submits that it will give bad signal to the society.

7. Having considered the rival submissions and after going through the records, it appears that there was a consensual relationship in between the petitioner and the informant since 2021, which continued till 2025. Although, the petitioner became a Teacher in 2022, even then both were in relationship till June 2025. After continuing in relationship for almost 5 years, the informant has filed the present case to put pressure on the petitioner. Considering the above let the petitioner above named in the event of arrest or surrender within

4/4 a period of six weeks, 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 Sri P. K. Ravi, Judicial Magistrate Purnea in connection with Bhawanipur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:

(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps 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. (Ritesh Kumar, J) Pallavi/AjayU T