Dharmraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89629 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== DHARMRAJ KUMAR S/o- Chokat Sahani R/o- Chhapara Tola Dumari PsSugauli Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
XXX D/o- Mahur Sahni Village- Chhapra Tola Dumari Ps- Sugauli DistEast Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Ms. Renu Kumari, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376, 354B, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this petitioner, on the false pretext of marriage, established physical relations with the informant and later on, refused to solemnize marriage.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89629 of 2024(5) dt.27-01-2026 2/2 behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, on the false pretext of marriage, repeatedly established physical relations with the victim and later on, refused to solemnize marriage. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T