Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37490/2025bail granted

Suraj Kumar @ Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-20Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37490 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-937 Year-2024 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Suraj Kumar @ Amit Kumar S/O Rajendra Singh R/O Village- Soni, P.SKargahar, Distt.- Rohtas. At present- Resident of Mohalla- Nahar Par, Takiya, P.S- Sasaram (Town), Dist.- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Golden Kumar S/O Rama Kant Raut R/O Village- Chandravan Patti, P.SKargahar, Dist.- Rohtas. 3.

Rinku Kumari D/O Rama Kant Raut, W/O Ankit Kumar R/O VillageChandravan Patti, P.S- Kargahar, Dist.- Rohtas. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP Mr. Raghunandan Kr. Singh, Advocate Ms. Riya Singh, Advocate Mr. Harendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sasaram (Town) P.S. Case No. 937 of 2024 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1052 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 64, 238, 89 of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per the prosecution story, marriage of the complainant was solemnized with co-accused Ankit Kumar on 21.05.2021 according to Hindu customs. Her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and two devers (brother-in-laws) including the petitioner inflicted atrocities for non-fulfillment of demand of motorcycle. This allegation has been made in paragraph 3 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37490 of 2025(2) dt.20-08-2025 2/2 complaint petition and in parapraph 4, she has made the allegation that the petitioner has committed rape upon her as a result of which she became pregnant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged victim denied for medical examination which shows that the present case is false and fabricated and the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances and clean antecedent of the petitioner, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Sasaram (Town) P.S. Case No. 937 of 2024 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1052 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C/ 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) priyanka/- U T