Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, two sureties, and specific conditions.
Summary
Raushan Kumar, husband of Puja Kumari, was arrested on 22‑12‑2025 in connection with a case involving alleged dowry demand and assault, charged under several IPC sections (313, 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506, 34) and the Dowry Prohibition Act. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail on the condition of paying a monthly amount to the informant, but he failed to comply with the payment orders despite their modification. The State and the informant opposed his bail application, arguing non‑compliance and further allegations of demanding Rs 5,00,000. The Court considered the nature of the allegations, the period of custody, and the petitioner’s failure to honour court orders, and nevertheless granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The bail order was issued subject to these conditions, and the Court directed that acceptance of the bond not be delayed for verification.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite his non‑compliance with earlier anticipatory bail payment conditions.
- Whether the allegations of assault and dowry demand justify denial of bail.
- Whether the Court can impose additional conditions relating to cooperation, presence, and verification of antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 7
- Indian Penal Code — s. 313, 323, 34, 341, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- dowry prohibition
- domestic violence
- IPC sections
- non‑compliance
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22705 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-795 Year-2023 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Raushan Kumar Son of Sonu Sah Resident of Village -Shivobahar PS-
Suryapura District -Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Puja Kumari Wife of Raushan Kumar Resident of Village- Badhaiyabag
Takiya Ward no. 10, Post- Takiya Bazar, Ps- Sasaram Town, Dist- Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party No. 2: Mr. Uma Shankar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nityanand, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Uma Shankar, learned counsel for the Informant
and Mr. Nityanand, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
22.12.2025, in connection with Sasaram Nagar (T) P.S. Case No.
795 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 01.09.2023 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 313, 341, 323, 498(A), 504, 506, 34 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition
Act.
3. The petitioner is the husband of the Opposite Party
No. 2 and there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22705 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34119 of 2024
with the condition that the petitioner shall pay Rs. 2500/- per
month to the Opposite Party No. 2 (informant) in the first week of
every month but the petitioner has not complied the same and later
on the petitioner has moved before this Court for modifying the
order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34119 of 2024 but
the same has been mofified vide order dated 12.09.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. No. 64806 of 2025 to the extent that the petitioner shall
pay Rs. 2,000/- per monthto the Opposite Party No. 2 but despite
of that the petitioner has not paid any amount as yet and thereafter
the petitioner has surrendered in the present case on 20.02.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand,
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has not honoured the order of this Court
and part from that the allegation against the petitioner that he
assaulted to the informant and apart from that the petitioner has
demanded Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lakh) from the family members of
the Opposite Party No. 2.
6. Considering the nature of allegation as well as period
of custody, let the petitioner, above named, 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 learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22705 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, District- Rohtas in connection
with Sasaram Nagar (T) P.S. Case No. 795 of 2023, subject to the
following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.