Patna High Court
Manohar Gupta @ Manohar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding a Section 82 declaration where the accusations against the accused are vague, unsupported and the procedural issuance of the declaration is questionable.
Summary
The petitioners, the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of the complainant, were implicated in a dowry harassment complaint (Case No. 384(C) of 2023) alleging demand for money, physical cruelty and assault under IPC Section 498A and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They filed an application for anticipatory bail, contending that the allegations against them were vague, unsupported by medical evidence, and that the process under Section 82 of the CrPC had been irregular. The State argued that a declaration under Section 82 had been issued against the petitioners. The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Asha Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh, which held that anticipatory bail can still be considered despite a Section 82 declaration. Finding that the petitioners were not specifically charged and that procedural lapses existed, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties. The order directed release on bail if the petitioners surrendered within four weeks, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted when a declaration under Section 82 of the CrPC has been made against the accused?
- Are the allegations under IPC Section 498A and the Dowry Prohibition Act sufficient to deny anticipatory bail to the petitioners?
- Was the issuance of summons, warrants and proclamation under Section 82 without due procedure valid?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments and Security System (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2), 82
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 82 CrPC
- dowry harassment
- IPC 498A
- procedural irregularities
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13904 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2023 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE
District- Munger
======================================================
1. Manohar Gupta @ Manohar Sah son of Late Sulan Gupta @ Sulan Sah @
Sulen Sah Resident of village- Parsando, Ps- Kharagpur, Dist- Munger, P/A-
residing at H. No.- 148e, Patel Nagar Jhaggi sec 65, Sihi Bazar
Gorh,Faridabad, Haryana
2. Seema Devi Wife of Manohar Gupta @ Manohar Sah Resident of village-
Parsando, Ps- Kharagpur, Dist- Munger, P/A- residing at H. No.- 148e, Patel
Nagar Jhaggi sec 65, Sihi Bazar Gorh,Faridabad, Haryana
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. smt. Neelu Kumari Wife of Manish Kumar Resident of village- Samda, Po
and ps- Haveli, Kharagpur, Dist- Munger
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Narayan, Adv.
: Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Adv.
: Ms. Harshita, Adv.
: Ms. Amrita Kumari, Adv.
: Ms. Aadya Dipti, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, App.
For the Informant : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Adv.
: Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 15-05-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail,
arises out of Complaint Case No. 384( C ) of 2023, disclosing
offences under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The Prosecution story, in brief, is that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13904 of 2026(4) dt.15-05-2026
2/4
complainant alleges that after her marriage with Manish Kumar
on 18.06.2018, her husband started demanding money from her
parental family and later subjected her to physical cruelty. It is
further alleged that the petitioners, being her in-laws, also
participated in assaulting her during matrimonial disputes, and
ultimately all accused persons expelled her from the
matrimonial home, compelling her to reside at her parental
house.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in
the present case due to a family dispute over distribution of sale
proceeds from the vegetable business and that the allegations
against them are vague, general, and unsupported by medical
evidence. It is submitted that the specific allegations of demand
of money and cruelty are solely against the husband, Manish
Kumar, while no specific allegation has been made against the
petitioners, who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law and
reside separately from the complainant and her husband. He
further submits that the learned court below proceeded illegally
by issuing summons, bailable warrants, non-bailable warrants,
and proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 without following due procedure.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13904 of 2026(4) dt.15-05-2026
3/4
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
informant submits that process under Section 82 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure has been issued against the petitioners.
6. I have heard learned cousel for the parties and
have gone through the materials available on record. The
petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the
complainant and entire family members have been made
accused in the present complaint case including the husband of
the complainant.
7. Insofar as issuance of process under Section 82
of the Code of Criminal Procedure is concerned, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in the case of Asha Dubey v. the State of
Madhya Pradesh, reported in 2024 SCC Online 5633, has held
as follows:-
"8. Coming to the consideration
of anticipatory bail, in the event of
declaration under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C, it
is not as if in all cases that there will be a
total embargo on considering the application
for the grant of anticipatory bail."
8. In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to grant
the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.
9. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
10. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13904 of 2026(4) dt.15-05-2026
4/4
of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four
weeks, 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 learned Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Complaint Case No.
384( C ) of 2023, subject to the condition laid down under
Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section
482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
HarshPandey/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.