Patna High Court
Saurabh Sunny @ Saurabh Kumar @ Saurabh SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court ordered the appellant’s release on pre‑arrest bail, directing the matter to be referred to the District Mediation Centre and disposing of the appeal.
Summary
The appellant, Saurabh Sunny, was charged under several IPC sections and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged dowry‑related physical and mental torture of his wife. The trial court denied his pre‑arrest bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. The Patna High Court held that the dispute is essentially matrimonial and private, not a societal offence, and therefore the court should encourage settlement through mediation. It directed the District Court to issue notices, refer the matter to the District Mediation Centre, and refrain from any coercive action against the appellant pending mediation. The court ordered that the appellant be released on pre‑arrest bail subject to the mediator’s efforts and the District Court’s discretion, and disposed of the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether a matrimonial dispute involving alleged dowry harassment under the SC/ST Act constitutes a criminal offence warranting denial of pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act can be invoked to obtain pre‑arrest bail in such circumstances.
- Whether the court should order mediation in place of continued criminal proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 341, 354B, 379, 498A, 504, 506
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s), 3(i)(wi)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- SC/ST Act
- dowry harassment
- matrimonial dispute
- mediation
- abuse of process
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3102 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
======================================================
Saurabh Sunny @ Saurabh Kumar @ Saurabh Sahni S/O Moti Prasad R/O-
J.P Colony, Ward No.-29, P.S - Town, District - Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anjali Kumari W/O Saurabh Sunny R/O- Village, J.P Colony, Ward No.-29,
P.S - Town, District - Madhubani, At present Churi Bazar, Dhobi Tol, Ward
No.-24, P.S- Town, Dist.- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar, ADvocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The appellant has preferred the appeal under
Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act against the rejection of
prayer for pre-arrest bail vide order dated 09.07.2025 by learned
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st-cum- Special Judge,
Madhubani in connection with Madhubani SC/ST P.S. Case
No.101/2024 registered under Sections
147,341,,379,354B,498A,504,506, of the Indian Penal Code
and Sections 3(i)(r),3(i)(S) and 3(i)(wi) and ,3(2)(va) of the
SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3102 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/5
informant, soon after her marriage, was subjected to physical
and mental torture by her husband and her in-laws due to non-
fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submitted that appellant is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that
appellant always tries to lead a peaceful married life with the
informant but she never co-operates with him on the instigation
of her family members. Learned counsel further submitted that
marriage is a sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish
suddenly erupts into hatred and the parties ponder to reconcile
their dispute outside the court.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
6. Learned counsel for the Appelant, on instruction,
submitted that the appellant has agreed to appear before the
learned District Court at 10:30 A.M. on 09.03.2026 for
resolving 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3102 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/5
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 it takes years and
years to conclude and in that process the parties lose
their “young” days in chasing their “cases” in different
courts.”
10. The appellant has willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on 09.03.2026, so that the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3102 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/5
matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
11. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to issue notices to the respective parties and
upon their appearance, refer the matter before the learned
Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for
appearance of the parties to give effect to Mediation 2.0.
12. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned upon appearance of the parties on the fixed date shall
make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and
thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned
District Court, well within a period of three months, till then, no
coercive action shall be taken against the appeellant in
connection with the aforesaid case.
13. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court, the appellant is required to be released on pre-
arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District
Court deems it fit and proper.
14. In case of failure on the part of the appellant to
appear on 09.03.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the appellant shall automatically lose its force.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3102 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
5/5
15. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the opposite
party no.2 to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection
granted to the appellant shall continue and the trial shall proceed
in accordance with law.
16. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, appellant
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
17. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present appeal stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…