Patna High Court
Md Sadakat @ Mohammad SadakatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner with bond and sureties, subject to conditions regarding maintenance payment and cancellation upon default.
Summary
The petitioner, Md Sadakat, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a criminal case (Araria Mahila PS Case No. 60 of 2024) involving offences under several sections of the BNS. He had earlier filed for anticipatory bail which was withdrawn after a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS, and a charge‑sheet was subsequently filed. The dispute is matrimonial; the petitioner, the husband, offered to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.6,000 to his wife (OP No.2) and the child. The wife’s counsel argued that the maintenance offer might be a ploy, but the State did not oppose the bail. The court, considering the parties’ submissions, granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, subject to the condition that the bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to pay maintenance for two consecutive months, and that maintenance will cease if a competent court fixes it.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in a case involving matrimonial dispute and multiple criminal charges.
- Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay maintenance can be imposed as a condition for anticipatory bail.
- The applicability of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 35 BNSS in the context of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- matrimonial dispute
- maintenance
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 35 BNSS
- bail conditions
- criminal charges
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2204 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria
======================================================
Md Sadakat @ Mohammad Sadakat Son of Md. Najir @ Md. Najeer R/o
Village - Chikani, Ward No. 03, P.S and District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Najistara Khatoon D/o Anisur Rahman, W/o Md. Sadakat R/o Village -
Chikani, Ward no. 03, PS. and Dist. - Araria.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhav Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the OP No. 2, Sri Viveka Nand Singh.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 85, 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail
by filing Cr. Misc No. 51798 of 2025 and the same was
permitted to be withdrawn as notice under Section 35 BNSS
was given to the petitioner. It is next submitted that thereafter
police submitted charge-sheet based on which cognizance came
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/4
to be taken hence petitioner apprehends arrest.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
dispute is matrimonial and petitioner is the husband. It is fairly
submitted that presently the relationship in between the
petitioner and the OP No. 2 has soured to an extent where it is
not possible to revive the conjugal relationship, but with passage
of time and on intervention of well-wishers, the parties may
resolve their dispute amicably. It is also submitted that petitioner
being husband is aware of his responsibility towards the OP
No.2 and the child, who presently is residing with the OP No. 2,
as such petitioner is willing to pay a monthly maintenance of
Rs. 6,000/- to the OP No. 2, which shall commence from 1-5-
2026.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OP No.
2 submits that it might be a ploy of the petitioner to seek
anticipatory bail and after obtaining anticipatory bail, the
monthly maintenance as agreed may not be credited in the
account of the OP No. 2, on which the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is
aware of the consequences which would entail in the event if the
petitioner breaches the undertaking given before this Court, it is
further submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/4
to the petitioner and subsequently if the petitioner does not pay
the amount of maintenance, in that event, his anticipatory bail
shall be liable to be cancelled, on which the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the OP No. 2 submits that since
petitioner is willing to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.
6,000/-, as such no useful purpose would be served by sending
the petitioner to jail as chances of future reconciliation will also
get marred.
6. The learned counsel for the OP No. 2 also submits
that he will WhatsApp the bank account number of the OP No. 2
on the WhatsApp number of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes
to communicate the same to the petitioner so that the monthly
maintenance commences from 1-5-2026.
7. Learned APP also does not oppose the anticipatory
bail application in view of the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties.
8. Considering the submission made by the learned
counsel for the parties, the petitioner above-named, in the event
of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from
today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
4/4
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Araria Mahila PS Case No. 60 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
9. However, it is made clear that OP No. 2 shall be at
liberty to file an application before this court seeking
cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner, in
the event if the petitioner does not deposit the monthly
maintenance as agreed for two consecutive months.
10. It is further made clear that the present
maintenance shall stop, if a court of competent jurisdiction fixes
the maintenance.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…