Patna High Court
Nand Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bail bond, sureties, and a monthly payment condition.
Summary
The petitioner, Nand Kumar Ray, sought anticipatory bail in a complaint (CR No. 433 of 2021) alleging offences under various sections of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, including domestic violence and dowry harassment. The prosecution alleged that after the marriage, the petitioner and his family tortured the complainant (his wife) for refusing to provide a four-wheeler, eventually evicting her from the matrimonial home. The petitioner denied any wrongdoing and offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as living expenses, an offer accepted by the complainant who was reportedly starving. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000, two sureties of equal amount, and the condition that the petitioner deposit Rs. 3,000 monthly into the complainant’s bank account. The order also invoked Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as a condition for the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner pending trial for the alleged offences.
- Whether imposing a monthly monetary payment to the complainant is a valid condition for anticipatory bail.
- Whether the allegations constitute offences under the cited sections of the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4, 6
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 313, 323, 325, 341, 379, 406, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- domestic violence
- dowry harassment
- Indian Penal Code
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16223 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-433 Year-2021 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - ROSERA Dis-
trict- Samastipur
======================================================
Nand Kumar Ray S/o Ramchandra Ray R/o Village- Pandh, PS- Dalsingh-
sarai, Distt- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sangita Kumari W/o Nand Kumar Ray, D/o Ram Kisun Ray R/o vill -
Pandh, P.S.- Dalsinghsarai, Distt.- Samastipur, Presently R/o vill - Kalyan-
pur ward no. 5, P.S.- Vibhutipur, Distt.- Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Khushi Awadh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 11-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned coun-
sel for the complainant - Opposite Party No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Complaint Case vide C.R. No. - 433 of 2021 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 341, 323, 498A, 313, 307, 406
and 379 of the I.P.C., 3, 4, 6 of the D.P. Act but process issued
under Section 498A, 325 and 379 of the I.P.C.
3. The prosecution case as per the complaint petition is that
the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the
petitioner according to Hindu rites and rituals on 09.05.2014. It
is alleged that after the marriage the complainant went to her
matrimonial home where she was pressurized to bring a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16223 of 2025(4) dt.11-05-2026
2/3
four-wheeler and due to non fulfillment of the demand the
petitioner and other family members tortured the complainant -
Opposite Party No. 2 physically as well as mentally and finally
ousted the Opposite Party No. 2 from her matrimonial home.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has
falsely been implicated in this case. However, without prejudice
to the right and contention of the petitioner and in order to
maintain harmony in the family, the petitioner undertakes to pay
a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the Opposite Party No. 2 as
“living cost” subject to the final outcome of the present case as
well as matrimonial case, if any, pending and / or decided be-
tween the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant / Opposite Party No. 2
submits that the complainant / Opposite Party No. 2 is at the
verge of starvation, having no source of income, and accepts
the offer so made by the petitioner and submits that the
petitioner may be directed to deposit the said amount of
Rs. 3,000/- per month in the bank account of the complainant /
Opposite Party No. 2, details of which shall be furnished by
learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 to learned counsel
for the petitioner within ten days from today.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16223 of 2025(4) dt.11-05-2026
3/3
6. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact
that offer made by the petitioner has been accepted by the
Opposite Party No. 2, as such, I am inclined to grant privilege
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest /
surrender before the learned court below within a period of six
weeks from today be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Anurag Verma,
learned Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rosera, Samas-
tipur in connection with Complaint Case vide CR No. 433 of
2021 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following condition:-
(i) that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of
Rs. 3,000/- per month in bank account of the
Opposite Party No. 2 positively by the 7th day of
every month starting from the month of June, 2026.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.