The court emphasizes mediation in matrimonial disputes, suggesting it as a preferable approach over litigation in domestic matters.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 28-01-2026 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar along with Mr. Shamir Mehra, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for OP No.2 and Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No.504 of 2024, registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 85 of BNS ( Section 498A of IPC).

3. As per the allegation made in the complaint petition, the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the petitioner on 02.05.2023 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. She further alleged that after some time, the co-accused persons including the petitioner started demanding Rs.2 lac as dowry for business and due to non-fulfilment of the same, they started torturing her and in the month of December, 2023, they assaulted and ousted her from the house. She further alleged that the petitioner has performed second marriage with another woman.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner in paragraph no.8 of the bail application, has specifically denied the allegation of second marriage.

5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submitted that a chance can be given to the parties for amicable settlement of the dispute outside the court.

6. At this stage, learned counsels for both the parties have jointly informed that their respective clients have given instruction that they want to resolve their strained relationship outside the court and they have shown their desire to appear before the learned District Court on 17.02.2026 at 10.30 A.M. so that the matter can be referred for mediation before the learned Mediator of the District Meditation Centre to resolve the dispute by way of mediation.

7. Heard the parties.

8. The matrimonial dispute is not an offense against the society rather a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict between spouses and does not inherently constitute an offence against society. However, a false case can have a disastrous consequence in absence of any criminal content. The personal dispute cannot call for a criminal offence. In such situation, continuation of the proceeding would amount to abuse of process of law leading to vexatious proceeding against the petitioner.

9. In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S.

Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675 , in paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-

“12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

13. The observations made by this Court, though in a slightly different context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad [ (2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733] are very apt for determining the approach required to be kept in view in a matrimonial dispute by the courts. It was said that there has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony, the main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where