Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85982 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2024 Thana- Gidhaur District- Jamui ====================================================== Suraj Kumar S/O Onkar Ravidas Vill.- Sewa, P.S- Gidhaur, Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Madhu Kumari D/O Prakash Ravidas Vill.- Pirator , P.S- Gidhour, DistJamui ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Pushpa Sinha, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The FIR discloses an allegation that the informant and the petitioner were married, but the petitioner did not take her along with him since he did not have a proper house. Subsequently, an allegation of demand of Rs. 1 lac has been made for the purpose of construction of the house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, denies the fact that any marriage has happened between the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85982 of 2024(4) dt.24-07-2025 2/3 and the informant. The petitioner and the informant were, no doubt, thrown together while on professional duty but no marriage was performed between them and the FIR also does not indicate any date of marriage and no proof of marriage has also been brought on record upon his denial of marriage. It is further submitted that the present petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant, however, oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail and standby the allegations made in the FIR. Learned counsel for the informant also points out that the petitioner has one more criminal antecedent which has been indicated in para 14 of the case diary. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits with regard to the same that in the said case, since the petitioner was not sent up, he did not indicate the same in para 3 of the bail application.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85982 of 2024(4) dt.24-07-2025 3/3 each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Gidhur P.S. Case No. 09 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/ 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023. (Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T