Patna High Court
Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dharmendra Kumar, filed an anticipatory bail application in connection with Complaint No. 452 of 2023 alleging offences under the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed that the allegations were false, stemming from a second marriage of the complainant and his own mental illness, supported by medical certificates. The court noted that notices to the opposite party (Rekha Devi) had not resulted in her appearance and that the petitioner’s mental condition was documented. Considering the lack of appearance, the existence of a second marriage, and the medical evidence, the court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The bail was ordered subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, including appearance before the trial court and non‑tampering with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Whether the allegations constitute a false or frivolous case given the petitioner’s mental health and the complainant’s second marriage
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 379, 498A, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- mental illness
- false case
- Section 438
- Section 482
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11157 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-452 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - PATNA CITY
District- Patna
======================================================
Dharmendra Kumar S/O Ramchandra Prasad R/O Vill- Vidhyapuri, P.S-
Hilsa, Dist - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rekha Devi W/O Ranjeet Kumar R/O Mohalla - Tulsi Mandi, P.S -
Alamganj, Dist - Patna. At Present resident of Bir, P.S - Dhanarua, Dist -
Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 18-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
view of the fact that the notices issued to opposite party no. 2
before the District Court, for securing a participation in the
proceeding, in which the opposite party no. 2 had not appeared
and even the notices served upon the opposite party no. 2, as per
the office report, has been returned with no clear report as to
why it has been returned and in view of the order passed by this
Court on 05.05.2026, this case was directed to be listed under
the heading “Admission”.
3. Today also, when this matter is called out to verify
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
2/6
the appearance on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and in case
he is called out nobody appeared for opposite party no. 2 and
accordingly, this case is being heard on merit.
4. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 452 of 2023, dated
18.04.2023 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 379, 504, 498(A), 34 of IPC and under Section 3,
4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. As per prosecution case, sufficient dowry articles
were given at the time of marriage of complainant’s daughther,
namely, Ganita Kumari. After marriage, she remained at her
matrimonial home for about ten days and thereafter returned to
her parental house. Subsequently, after second marriage
(Duragaman), a female child was born on 11.04.2019,
whereafter the accused persons allegedly started subjecting her
to cruelty and harassment on account of birth of a female child
and further demanded Rs. 3 lakhs as additional dowry. It is
further alleged that the accused persons tortured her and
deprived her of food.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as
per the allegations levelled in the FIR, it is evident that the
marriage between the opposite party no. 2 and the petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
3/6
taken place on 19.04.2018 according to Hindu rites and customs
and as per the allegation, at the time of marriage the valuables
and cash were given and immediately after 10 days of marriage,
the opposite party no. 2 is said to have returned to his parents
house. Again, after three months, her second marriage was
performed and one female child blessed from wedlock to the
Ganita Kumari but because of the torture with her daughter, the
panchayti is said to have taken place but the assault did not stop
and even the in-laws used to abuse opposite party no. 2 and
money was demanded from opposite party no. 2 leading to
filing of the instant case.
7. The case of the petitioner is that due to mental
problems of the petitioner, opposite party no. 2 has herself
started to disliking this petitioner and contracted another
marriage in the year 2022 along with Ravi Raj Son of Yogendra
Prasad, R/O Village Kaushik Nagar, P.S.- Hilsa, District
Nalanda and permanent address R/O Gosain Math, P.S.- Hilsa,
District Nalanda and has started residing along with him and
one female child has also taken birth from second marriage in
the month of November, 2025 and the instant false case has
been filed by her mother, namely, Rekha Devi which is false and
frivolous. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
4/6
mentally fit and his treatment is being given from different
doctors/hospitals including Mental Hospital, Kanke, Ranchi as
is being evident from the documents appended with the
anticipatory bail petition which is appended as Annexure-P/2
and the opposite party no. 2 herself has refused to reside with
this petitioner which is evident from the certificates as has been
provided by Sindhu Kumar, Ward No. 22 of Ward Parishad,
Hilsa, Nalanda which goes to show that the opposite party no. 2
is residing along with Ravi Raj and due to mental problem to the
petitioner, the opposite party no. Ganita Kumari used to dislike
him and due to such dislike, opposite party no. 2 has contracted
second marriage and is residing along with him and one female
child has also taken birth out of the second marriage in the
month of November, 2025.
8. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that there is already a second marriage contracted and despite
notices having been issued to opposite party no. 2 in this case,
he has not ensured the appearance in the present proceeding in
this Court and also considering the materials available on record
and looking to the mental conditions as evident from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
5/6
medical prescriptions appended with the instant bail petition,
this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner.
10. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna
City, in connection with Complaint Case No. 452 of 2023,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
6/6
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
Abhishek/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.