SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3668

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Sachin Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72866 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav
For the Respondents: Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Mr. Dhramveer

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions, emphasizing temporary relief to the informant in matrimonial context and failure of mediation attempts.

Headnote:The petitioner, apprehending arrest under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 504 and 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, sought anticipatory bail. The court noted the failure of mediation and emphasized the petitioner's willingness to provide temporary relief of Rs. 3,000/- monthly to the informant, subject to bail conditions. The court eventually granted bail with specific conditions. The ruling emphasized the availability of remedy in matrimonial proceedings and the dependency of the temporary relief on the marriage context.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

3 02-12-2025 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Dhramveer, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

2. The petitioner, husband of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2, apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A , 341, 323, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act .

3. Earlier, vide order dated 18.01.2025, the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High Court. From perusal of mediator’s report dated 26.03.2025 it is apparent that despite best efforts, the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation.

4. As per prosecution case, marriage of informant/Opposite Party No. 2 was solemnized with this petitioner and thereafter, all the F.I.R. accused persons, including this petitioner, started demanding dowry and due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 was subjected to cruelty and harassment.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner denies the allegations made in the F.I.R.. As a matter of fact, petitioner never committed torture to informant/Opposite Party No. 2 or demanded any dowry. However, the petitioner undertakes to give Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month by way of temporary relief/solace, starting from this month, to the antecedents.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month to informant/Opposite Party No. 2, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the petitioner, above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur in connection with Naugachia Mahila P.S. Case No. 20 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. with further following conditions:

“(A.) Informant/Opposite Party No. 2 would file an affidavit before the court below and bring on record her saving bank account number for its communication to the petitioner.

(B.) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid amount per month in the saving bank account of the (C.) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail bond. (D.) The aforementioned payment will be subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.”

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top