Dipak Kumar Rajbanshi @ Pradip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.340 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2024 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Dipak Kumar Rajbanshi @ Pradip Kumar Son of Late Bhuneshwar Rajbanshi @ Budhan Rajbanshi Resident of Vill- Partapur, P.S.- Rajauli, DistrictNawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Deo Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-02-2025 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 Govindpur Police Station Case No. 205 of 2024, disclosing offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report is that, the marriage of the informant's sister Nitu Devi was solemnised with Sandip Rajbanshi about five years ago and during this period Dewar (brother-in-law) of Nitu Devi used to come to informant's house. It is further alleged that about two years ago, petitioner, on the pretext of marriage, established the physical relationship with the informant and continued to do so with her for the last two years. It is further alleged that they

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.340 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 2/3 used to talk on mobile phone and the petitioner used to come at the informant's house and this activity continued for a long time.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to oblique motive. He further submits that the relationship between petitioner and informant was consensual and the same continued for a long period of time i.e., about more than two years. In the F.I.R., it has been alleged that when the informant proposed for marriage, the petitioner denied and threatened to kill her, inasmuch as, the informant wanted to solemnised marriage with the petitioner and upon denial, due to family reason, the present F.I.R. has been lodged. He next submits that it is not the case of the informant that from the very inception, the intention of the petitioner was to deceive and cheat in order to establish physical relationship.

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that relationship between petitioner and the informant continued for a long time and it is not the case of the informant that from the very beginning the intention of the petitioner was not to marry the informant, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.340 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 3/3 anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.

7. 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 each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada, in connection with Govindpur Police Station Case No. 205 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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