Patna High Court
CR. MISC./46091/2026 of Sandeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46091 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2026 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ====================================================== Sandeep Kumar S/o Suresh Das R/o Village- Radhanagar, Sono, P.S- Sono, Dist- Jamui. ... ...
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46091 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2026 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ======================================================
Sandeep Kumar S/o Suresh Das R/o Village- Radhanagar, Sono, P.S- Sono, Dist- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
19-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 94 of 2026, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 115(1), 351(1), 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the pretext of marriage, the petitioner has established physical relation with the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that both the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46091 of 2026(3) dt.19-08-2026
parties were in love and the informant is major. It is next submitted that the petitioner is alleged to have established physical relationship on the assurance of marriage. Subsequently, for one reason or the other, the marriage could not be solemnized and for the said reason, the present case has been instituted. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said relationship was a consensual relationship between the parties. He has further placed reliance on cases of the Hon’ble Supreme Court since reported in 2018 SCC Online SC-3100 (Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar versus The State of Maharastra & Ors) and (2019) 9 SCC 608 (Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.). The petitioner is in custody since 19.05.2026 and has got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46091 of 2026(3) dt.19-08-2026
Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 94 of 2026, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner. (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
Rajorshi/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T