Chandan Kumar @ Anurag Singh @ Anurag Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85274 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- BADHAILA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Anurag Singh @ Anurag Kumar Son of Mahendra Singh Resident of Village - Chhanha, P.S. - Baghaila, District - Rohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sangeeta Kumari Wife of Chandan Kumar @ Anurag Singh @ Anurag Kumar, D/o Late Babulal Singh Resident of Village - Chhanha, P.S. - Baghaila, District - Rohtas at Sasaram. At present - Village- Tarna, P.O.- Bhaluni Dham, P.S. Dinara, District, Rohtas at Sasaram, PIN- 802218 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Irshad Ahmad Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP for the O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Irshad Ahmad Khan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta learned APP for the State and Mr. Vinay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Baghaila P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 85, 5(3) of the BNS and Section 3⁄4 of D.P. Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted mediation between the parties has failed and O.P. No.2 has filed maintenance case and the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85274 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026 2/2 has received a notice in that regard by the concerned learned District Court.

4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court finds that, despite the best efforts of the Mediator of this Court, the mediation between the parties has failed. In such circumstances, the conduct of the petitioner indicates that he is no longer willing to live with Opposite Party No. 2, suggesting an irretrievable breakdown of the marital relationship between the parties. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order.

5. The interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 15.12.2025 is hereby recalled with a liberty to the respective parties to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law before the learned District Court or the Family Court.

6. The bail application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T