Prince Kumar @ Prince Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23465 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-391 Year-2025 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur

======================================================

Prince Kumar @ Prince Kumar Singh S/o Sanjeev Kumar, Resident of Village- Raghuchak, Village- Andhar, P.S- Sultanganj, Distt.- Bhagalpur, Bihar- 813213.

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Pravin Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶9

5 15-07-2026

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶11

A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 391 of 2025 dated 29.08.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 80 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶13

As per the prosecution case, grand-daughter of the informant got married with the petitioner in July, 2024, but few days after marriage there has been continuous demand of dowry and consequent torture of the grand-daughter of the informant. Though the informant gave Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry, his granddaughter was still tortured. On 27.08.2025, the informant received the news of death of his grand-daughter.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23465 of 2026(5) dt.15-07-2026 2/3

¶16

petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is an eighteen year old youth and bears a good character and during investigation no person has made any complaint against him. It was a love marriage and allegation of demand of dowry is not believable. Even the witnesses examined during investigation have not supported the case of prosecution regarding the petitioner or his family members killing the grand-daughter of informant and disposing of the dead body. Learned counsel further submits that rather the witnesses have stated that the grand-daughter of the informant committed suicide and the information was given to her parental home and the informant and other persons came and attended the last rights and the cremation of the deceased (informant’s grand-daughter). Thereafter, returning back to their village, they lodged this false case. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is having clean antecedent and chargesheet has been submitted. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2025.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is husband of the deceased and there is allegation that he killed his wife and disposed of the dead body.

¶18

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23465 of 2026(5) dt.15-07-2026 3/3

¶20

nature of allegation which appears to be doubtful and also considering the age of the petitioner, his clean antecedent, his period of custody and the submission of chargesheet against him, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Bhagalpur / concerned Court, in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 391 of 2025 , subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:

¶21

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the

¶22

petitioner.

¶23

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.

¶24

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

¶25

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶26

Shahnawaz/- U T

Prince Kumar @ Prince Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince Kumar @ Prince Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjit Kumar Vs Shivani Kumari

Arjun Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Vishwakarma Vs Anita Kumari

Bhushan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Shobha Devi Vs The State of Bihar