The court establishes that anticipatory bail can be granted under specific conditions, particularly in dowry-related cases when mediation fails and allegations are deemed frivolous.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

5 16-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 5 of 2024 dated 21.03.2024 registered for the offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506, 379, 109 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 .

3. As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that she was married to the petitioner and immediately after the marriage, the petitioner and others started demanding cash and motorcycle as dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was thrown out of her house and even during one stay at her parents’ house, it is alleged that the petitioner has taken away Rs.10,000/- after breaking the lock of almirah.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations with regard to the demand of dowry and assault are all frivolous. It has been submitted that despite best efforts during the mediation, nothing fruitful resulted out of such efforts made at the Mediation and Conciliation Center and in fact the petitioner has given in writing that he is not ready to keep the informant. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations even if taken on its face value are general and omnibus and the petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned APP for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and stated that it is the petitioner who is not ready to live as husband and wife with the informant, while the informant has given in writing that she is eager to stay with the petitioner. It has also been submitted that for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the petitioner has been torturing the informant and has ultimately thrown her out of the house.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the fact that despite the best efforts by the Mediation and Conciliation Center the settlement could not be arrived at between the parties and it has also been observed that the petitioner is not ready to keep the informant as his legally wedded wife. In such circumstances, it is open for the parties to move the competent Court for settlement.

7. Accordingly, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 5 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:-

(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

(iii) In case of absence on two 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.

(iv) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

9. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

(Sourendra Pandey,