Geeta Verma @ Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75778 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Geeta Verma @ Geeta Devi W/o Vinod Verma @ Vinod Prasad Verma @ Binod Verma R/o Village- Kothwar, PS- Bahera, District- Gaya 2.
Vinod Verma @ Binod Kumar @ Vinod Prasad Verma S/o Munni Mahto R/o Village- Kothwar, PS- Bahera, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Senior Advocate Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Bhim Sen Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-11-2025 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Rakesh Singh for the petitioners, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. Petitioners apprehends their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 69 of B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no.1 is a woman and the informant alleges that she came in contact with Abhishek Kumar Verma about four years back and he on false promise of marriage established physical relation
2/4 and the informant became pregnant, further Abhishek married her in a temple but after she became pregnant, he closed all contacts after deleting all photos and videos, accordingly, informant along with her father came to the house of Abhishek, but were abused by the petitioners and they demanded Rs.10,00,000/- and a car.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners being parents of Abhishek came to be falsely implicated by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that thrust of allegation is against Abhishek as the informant alleges that she came in touch with him and for the last four years they were in a relationship and when she became pregnant, Abhishek closed all contacts with her and even deleted the videos and photos from the mobile. It is submitted that as far as allegation of demand of dowry is alleged, the same is ornamental. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation, as alleged in the FIR, it manifest that the relationship in between Abhishek and the informant was consensual but then it is for Abhishek to either accept or rebut the said allegation. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case being parents of
3/4 Abhishek. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that specific pleading has been made at para8 of the anticipatory bail application that informant was earlier married to Bindu Kumar @ Rajeev Kishore on 21.05.2011 at Surya Mandir, Hilsa and the said marriage was also a love marriage but subsequently the present informant instituted Complaint Case No.138 of 2021 against Rajeev Kishore in which cognizance was taken under Sections 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act. It is submitted that Rajeev is on bail in the said case. It is next submitted that the FIR does not even remotely discloses that informant was married from before.
5. The learned APP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the anticipatory bail application but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that informatn was earlier married with Rajeev Kishore rather learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant submits that since the relationship in between informant and Abhishek soured, as such, she performed her marriage with Rajeev on which the learned Senior Counsel submits that marriage of informant with Rajeev was performed in the year
4/4 2011 and the instant FIR came to be instituted in the year 2025 wherein informant has alleged that for the last four years she was in relationship with Abhishek.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No.248 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T