[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Kamal Gupta @ Kamal Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 27 August, 2025
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40004 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- PAHARKATTA District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Kamal Gupta @ Kamal Kumar S/o Harihar Gupta Bhimbalish, Ward no. 4,
Thakurganj, PS- Thakurganj, Kishanganj, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Apurv Harsh, Adv.
Mr. Manu Tripurari, Adv.
Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Adv.
Ms. Jaya Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 88
of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that it is a fit case where the Superintendent
of Police, Kishanganj be directed to investigate the informant
and thereafter to institute an FIR against her. It is next submitted
that from perusal of the facts as pleaded in the supplementary
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40004 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
2/5
affidavit, it would manifest that the informant is in habit of
extorting innocent people. It is next submitted that in sum and
substance, the allegation as alleged in the FIR is that petitioner
based on false promise of marriage established physical
relationship with the informant and thereafter resiled from
marrying her.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner next submits
that informant is married from before and from her earlier
marriage, she had two children, thereafter she married one Md.
Nasir against whom she has instituted Pahadkatta P.S. Case No.
83 of 2021 dated 26.08.2021 under Section 341, 323, 379,
498A, 504, 506 and 34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the
Muslim Women Protection of Right on Marriage Act, 2019, it is
further submitted that informant has also instituted one
Maintenance Case No. 57 of 2022 in the Court of learned
Principal Judge, Kishanganj against Md. Nasir seeking
maintenance, it is thus submitted that informant is married from
before with Nasir. It is also asserted and submitted that Nasir is
her second husband. It is next submitted that informant already
has instituted an FIR and a maintenance case against Nasir
seeking maintenance. It is further submitted that the instant FIR
has been instituted with the aforesaid allegations. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40004 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
3/5
submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that informant
was married from before. It is also submitted that both
informant and the petitioner are adults and the relationship was
consensual. It is also submitted that petitioner is also a married
person. It is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to
reason that when informant herself is a married woman, then on
what basis she is alleging that petitioner refused to marry her, it
is thus asserted and submitted that the present FIR is nothing but
an attempt on part of the informant to extort the petitioner and
this aspect of the matter must be investigated, as in the district
of Kishanganj, such cases are promptly being instituted.
5. Learned APP for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that
though it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner that informant is married to Nasir and
has instituted an FIR and a maintenance case against the
petitioner, but then he has no such instruction on the said issue.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submits that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40004 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
4/5
informant in the FIR has stated that she is a divorcee, but then
she is pursuing both FIR and the maintenance case against
Nasir. It is reiterated and submitted that relationship was purely
consensual and when the same soured, the present false FIR
came to be instituted. It is further submitted that petitioner will
not abscond rather will co-operate in the investigation to prove
his innocence.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Pahadkatta P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite
giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the
investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40004 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
5/5
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent the concerned
police station through the learned Trial Court.
10. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link