Patna High Court
Dilip Ray @ Dileep Kumar @ Dilip RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions including monthly payment of Rs.3,000 to the complainant.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilip Ray, was accused in a 2019 complaint of offences under IPC sections 323, 504, 379, 498A and the Dowry Prohibition Act (sections 3 and 4) for alleged torture and dowry harassment of his wife, Indrasan Kumari. The petitioner denied the allegations and offered to pay a temporary relief of Rs.3,000 per month to the complainant. After mediation failed, the petitioner applied for bail. The Court, considering the petitioner’s undertaking and the need to prevent arrest, granted bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and the inherent powers of the High Court (Section 482), subject to a bail bond, sureties, and conditions including monthly payments and an affidavit by the complainant. The order also stipulated that failure to make two consecutive payments could lead to cancellation of bail. The bail order was issued pending further proceedings in the criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in a dowry harassment complaint pending investigation under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482 of the High Court.
- Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay interim relief can be a condition for bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 379, 498A, 504
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 High Court
- temporary relief
- mediation failure
- criminal miscellaneous
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10233 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2464 Year-2019 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Vaishali
======================================================
Dilip Ray @ Dileep Kumar @ Dilip Rai Son of Gonaur Ray Resident of
village- Chandpur Dhamaun PS -Patepur Dist -Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Indrasan Kumari wife of Dilip Ray @ Dileep Kumar Resident of village-
Chandpur Dhamaun PS -Patepur Dist -Samastipur P/A- Daughter of
Deonandan Ray Resident of Mahnar Tanra, Ward no. 15, Ps- Mahnar, Dist-
Vaishali
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Brajendra Nath Pandey, A.P.P.
Mr.Jainendra Kumar, Adv.for OP-2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 09-07-2026 Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was
referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre of Patna High
Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved
through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant /
opposite party no. 2.
3. The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.
2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the
offences under Sections 323, 504, 379, 498(A) of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10233 of 2026(4) dt.09-07-2026
2/3
4. Petitioner is alleged to have committed torture and
harassment with opposite party no. 2 for dowry.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner denies the allegation made in the complaint petition
and submits that he never committed torture to opposite party
no. 2 or demanded any dowry. However, the petitioner
undertakes to give Rs. 3,000/-per month by way of temporary
relief/solace, starting from this month, to the opposite party
no.2.
6. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for
the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary
relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) per month
to the opposite party no. 2, in the event of arrest/surrender
within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above-named
petitioner 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., Vaishali at Hajipur
in connection with Complaint Case No. 2464 of 2019, subject to
the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. as well as on
the following conditions:-
“(1) Opposite party no. 2 would file an affidavit
before the court below and bring on record her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10233 of 2026(4) dt.09-07-2026
3/3
savings bank account number for its
communication to the petitioner.
(2) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid amount
per month in the savings bank account of the
opposite party no. 2.
(3) 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.
(4) 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)
anay
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.