Anand Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65899 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- Marnga District- Purnia ====================================================== Anand Kumar Gupta Son of Chandan Gupta Resident of Village - Dharhar Jamuniya, Police Station - Dhamdaha, District - Purnia. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Seema Kumari Daughter of Pramod Sah Resident of village - Sahara, Police Station - Maranga, District - Purnia ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Maranga Police Station Case No. 183 of 2025, disclosing offences under Sections 140(3), 87, 64, 303(2), 81, 351(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that informant alleged that on the pretext of marriage, the petitioner allegedly established physical relationship with her. It is further alleged that the petitioner threatened to solemnize the marriage and forcibly took her to Chhapra, where he communicated with his parents. Thereafter, he called her to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65899 of 2025(4) dt.24-02-2026 2/3 Purnea but allegedly abandoned her there and fled along with his friend, Prince. It is alleged that the informant's documents and a sum of Rs. 23,000/- were with his friend at that time. When confronted, the petitioner reportedly refused to marry the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the informant were in a consensual relationship and that the informant, being a major, had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner on 14.05.2025. Due to family objections, the petitioner expressed his inability to marry at that time and asked her to return home, which she did. The F.I.R. was lodged after an unexplained delay of eight days. It is thus submitted that no offence has been committed and the petitioner has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive.

5. Regards being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the allegation of physical relation through deceitful means, including false promises of marriage, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65899 of 2025(4) dt.24-02-2026 3/3

6. In the result, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T