Patna High Court
Afzal AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Afzal Alam, sought bail in a dowry harassment case (Bettiah Mahila P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025) where he was accused of demanding dowry and assaulting his wife. The prosecution alleged that the wife’s family paid Rs. 5 lakh as dowry and later demanded additional dowry and a four-wheeler, leading to her alleged torture and eviction. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, the FIR was delayed, and there was no dowry demand because his sister’s marriage linked the families. The court noted that the marriage was indeed in 2022, the sister’s marriage linked the families, and that the opposite party failed to appear despite service of notice. Considering these facts, the court ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent under Section 482(2) and a condition for cancellation if antecedents are concealed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in the dowry harassment case pending trial.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the alleged false nature of the complaint affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial or cancellation of bail.
- Whether the familial relationship between the parties negates the existence of a dowry demand.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 115(2), 127(2), 3(5), 482(2), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- domestic violence
- Section 85
- Section 115(2)
- Section 127(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- criminal antecedent
- verification
- non-appearance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15508 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran
======================================================
Afzal Alam S/o Late Noorjan Miyan @ Late Noorjan Ali R/o vill - Basara,
P.S.- Majhauliya, Distt.- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kirdar Phatima @ Kirdar Fatma W/o Afzal Alam R/o vill - Basara, Ward no.
3, P.S.- Majhauliya, Distt.- West Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 20-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. It appears from the office report dated 29.04.2026 that
notices were received by the brother of the opposite party no. 2 and
on the basis of the same, vide order dated 06.05.2026 passed in this
case, the matter was directed to be listed under the heading ‘For
Admission’.
3. Today, the matter has been listed under the heading ‘For
Admission’ and despite service of notice through process server,
which has been received by the brother of the opposite party no. 2,
none appears for the opposite party no. 2.
4. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Bettiah Mahila P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025, for allegedly having
committed offence under Sections 85, 115(2), 127(2), 3(5) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15508 of 2026(4) dt.20-05-2026
2/4
BNS and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. As per the prosecution story which has been lodged on
the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to the effect
that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner about three
years ago and in her marriage, her father spent approximately Rs. 5
lakhs. When she went to her matrimonial home, after some days, the
petitioner and his family members started demanding Rs. 5 lakhs
towards dowry and a four-wheeler. She further alleged that due to
non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry, she was mentally and
physically tortured and out of the wedlock, she gave birth to a child
who is approximately four months old. It has further been alleged
that on 02.09.2025 at about 10:00 AM, all the family members of the
petitioner assaulted her and snatched her stree dhan and she was
ousted from the house. A Panchayati was conducted, but her in-laws
are not ready to accept the decision of the Panchayati.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that the prosecution case is entirely false and concocted. No
such occurrence has taken place. The occurrence is of 02.09.2025
and the First Information Report has been lodged after a delay of
almost 25 days i.e. on 27.09.2025 and no explanation has been given
in the First Information Report with regard to the delay. It is further
submitted that the petitioner is the husband and he is ready to keep
his wife with full dignity and honour. It is further submitted that the
marriage of the petitioner is a gulty marriage since the marriage of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15508 of 2026(4) dt.20-05-2026
3/4
the sister of the petitioner was solemnized with the brother of the
informant and the informant is the wife of the petitioner, therefore,
there is no question of demand of any dowry. It is further submitted
that the petitioner is an accused in one another case i.e. Majhauliya
P.S. Case No. 605 of 2021 in which he is on bail.
7. Per contra, the learned APP for the State opposes the
prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner, being
the husband of the informant has a duty cast upon him to keep his
wife with full dignity in which he has failed.
8. Having considered the rival submissions and after
going through the records, it appears that the marriage of the
petitioner was solemnized with the informant in 2022 and it is also a
fact, that the marriage of the sister of the petitioner was solemnized
with the brother of the informant. Further, despite notices issued and
validly served upon the opposite party no. 2, she chooses not to
appear in the present proceeding and it has been stated in the petition
that the petitioner is ready and willing to keep the wife i.e. the
informant with full dignity.
9. Considering the facts aforesaid, let the petitioner, above
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Mahila P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15508 of 2026(4) dt.20-05-2026
4/4
Case No. 43 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with a further condition that :-
The learned court concerned shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that
the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court
concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the
name of verification.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
priyanka/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.