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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3534

PATNA HIGH COURT
PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH, J
YASHWANT SINGH @ SANTOSH SINGH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR – Respondent
Cr. Misc. No. 42716 of 2024 | PS. Case No.-208 Year-2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Vinod Kumar Seth
For the Respondents: Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP

Modification of court orders regarding maintenance can only be adjudicated in trial, not during appeals.

Headnote:The Court considered the provisions regarding anticipatory bail and the conditions of interim relief imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner’s modification request on ground of changed circumstances was held as not falling within the Court's jurisdiction to ascertain, determining the matter should await trial proceedings. The petition was consequently dismissed.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

3 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for modification of order dated 13.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42716 of 2024 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court whereby the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail with a condition to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) per month, as interim solace/maintenance, in the bank account of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of aforesaid order, petitioner is regularly paying aforesaid amount in the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2 but the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 does not wants to live with this petitioner and has also suppressed the fact that she is a divorced lady and, therefore, the order dated 13.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42716 of 2024 requires modification, so far as payment of Rs. 5,000/-, as maintenance, is concerned. 4. This Court, while allowing pre-arrest bail to the petitioner vide order dated 13.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42716 of 2024, on the submission of petitioner himself, had directed him to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as interim relief/solace to Opposite Party No.2 with observation that the aforesaid payment will be subject to any order passed in the maintenance case for final settlement. The issue of maintenance or the fact that the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 is a divorced lady and has suppressed this information cannot be decided by this Court. It can only be decided by the concerned Court at the stage of trial after giving full opportunity to both the parties and as such, the modification petition cannot be allowed on this ground alone.

5. Accordingly, this modification petition is dismissed.

(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