Purushotam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79686 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya ====================================================== Purushotam Kumar son of Doman Mahto @ Doman Prasad Village -Pachrukhi P.S.-Khizersarai District -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Malti Kumari Daughter of Umesh Prasad Singh Resident Of Village- Daya Bigha, Ps- Makhdumpur, dist- Jehanabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 69, 352, 351(2), 3(4) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner on false promise of marriage started living with the informant as husband and wife. They lived together from year 2021 to April, 2025 and thereafter family members of the petitioner came at their residence and took him away. Petitioner had also withdrawn Rs. 30,000/- from the account of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79686 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026 2/3 admittedly both the petitioner and the informant were adults at the time of occurrence and on account of their free will and consent they started having a relationship and living together. The allegation made by the informant/victim of twice getting abortion done is not substantiated by any documentary evidence. It is only on account of certain inevitable reasons that the relationship could not continue and such breakup has resulted in the informant trying to damage the reputation of the petitioner who never entered into any relationship by giving false promise of marriage. The petitioner is in custody since 12.06.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State however opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the informant/victim has supported the case of prosecution in her statement recorded u/s 183 of BNSS by stating that the petitioner had made physical relationship with her since 2021 on the false promise of marriage.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the possibility of the relationship between the petitioner and the informant who are both adults not having materialized on account of several reasons, coupled with the fact that the petitioner having no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79686 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026 3/3 criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 12.06.2025 and charge-sheet has already been submitted, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned S.D.J.M., Gaya /concerned Court below in connection with Mahila Thana P.S. Case No. 26 of 2025.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Ranjeet/- U T