Patna High Court
SANJAY KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The High Court quashed the cancellation of bail and confirmed the provisional bail, directing fresh bail bonds, and ordered the lower court to decide the application for setting aside the ex‑parte order within two months.
Summary
The petitioner Sanjay Kumar was charged under Section 498A IPC and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Rampur P.S. Case No. 243 of 2016. He was granted provisional bail by the High Court on 15‑05‑2017, but the lower court cancelled his bail bonds on 24‑01‑2018 after an informant alleged mistreatment of his wife, linking the cancellation to a condition of dignified treatment. The petitioner challenged the cancellation, arguing that the maintenance order against him was ex‑parte, while the opposite party contended he had not paid the maintenance. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court judgments in Arnesh Kumar and Gajanan Dattatray Gore, quashed the cancellation orders, confirmed the provisional bail and directed the petitioner to surrender, execute fresh bail bonds and cooperate with the trial court. In a related application, the Court directed the Family Court to decide on setting aside an ex‑parte order under Cr.P.C. 126(2) within two months and to proceed ex‑parte against the non‑cooperating party, thereafter disposing of that application.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the bail bonds granted to the petitioner was lawful under the conditions of bail and the allegations of mistreatment.
- Whether the maintenance order against the petitioner, issued ex‑parte, is enforceable.
- Whether the lower court's orders dated 24‑01‑2018 and 10‑01‑2019 should be set aside.
- Whether the ex‑parte order passed by the Family Court under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. can be set aside.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 126(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- bail
- maintenance
- Section 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- ex‑parte order
- Criminal Revision
- Family Court
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38842 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2016 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
SANJAY KUMAR Son of Mohan Prasad Resident of Road No. 3B Shastri
Nagar Near Dariyapur House, P.S.- Rampur, District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Sweta Kumari Wife of Sanjay Kumar Resident of Village - New Godam
Rajendra Path Sabzi Mandi, P.S.- Kotwali, District - Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26583 of 2022
======================================================
SANJAY KUMAR Son of Mohan Prasad Resident of Village - Road No.3B,
Shastri nagar Dariyapur House, P.s.- Rampur, Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Sweta Kumari W/o Sanjay Kumar Resident of Village - New Goadam ,
Rajendra Path Sabzi Mandi, P.s.- Kotwali, Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 38842 of 2019)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh
For the O.P. No. 02 : Mr. Apurva Harsh
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26583 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Saurabh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari
For the O.P. No. 02 Mr. Apurva Harsh
Mr. Rabindra Nath Tiwari
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
22 29-01-2026 Re:- Criminal Miscellaneous No. 38842 of 2019
Heard the parties.
2. This application is filed against the order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38842 of 2019(22) dt.29-01-2026
2/4
10.01.2019 passed in Criminal Revision No. 33 of 2018 by the
Sessions Judge, Gaya, affirming the order dated 24.01.2018
passed by the learned SDJM, Gaya in G.R. No. 4600 of 2016 /
Trial No. 3220 of 2017 arises out of Rampur P.S. Case No. 243
of 2016 by which the bail bonds of the petitioner has been
cancelled.
3. The summarized facts of the case is that one
Rampur P.S. Case No. 243 of 2016 was registered under Section
498A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section ¾ of the D.P.
Act on the written petition filed by the opposite party no. 02.
Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court and was granted
provisional bail by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2017
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3083 of 2017. The petitioner appeared
before the Court below for furnishing his bail bonds and
thereafter the SDJM, Gaya, upon execution of bail bonds, was
granted bail provisionally for a period of six months and
1.8.2017 was fixed by the Court below for hearing. On
1.8.2017, the informant submitted that she was not properly
treated by her in-laws and therefore, the learned SDJM, Gaya
cancelled the bail bonds of the petitioner on 24.01.2018, as the
same was granted with a condition that the petitioner will keep
his wife with full dignity and care. The petitioner also preferred
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38842 of 2019(22) dt.29-01-2026
3/4
a Criminal Revision vide Cr. Revision No. 33 of 2018 but the
same has also been rejected on 10.01.2019.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 02
submits the petitioner is not paying the maintenance amount
which has been fixed by the court below.
5. In reply to the aforesaid submission, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the maintenance order
was an ex-parte order.
6. In the opinion of this Court, for execution of the
order granting maintenance/recovery of the maintenance
amount, the opposite party no. 02 can take recourse, as per law.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussions and in view of
the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273
and also in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Gajanan Dattatray Gore Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Anr reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1571,
this application is allowed.
8. Accordingly, the order dated 10.01.2019 passed in
Criminal Revision No. 33 of 2018 by the Sessions Judge, Gaya,
and the order dated 24.01.2018 passed by the learned SDJM,
Gaya in G.R. No. 4600 of 2016 / Trial No. 3220 of 2017 arising
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38842 of 2019(22) dt.29-01-2026
4/4
out of Rampur P.S. Case No. 243 of 2016, are hereby quashed.
9. The provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide
order dated 15.05.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3083 of 2017 is
hereby confirmed. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the
Court below and execute fresh bail bonds and is directed to
participate in the proceedings of the Court below.
Re:- Criminal Miscellaneous No. 26583 of 2022
10. Heard the parties.
11. This application has been filed against the
interlocutory order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Gaya on 30.11.2021 in Misc. Case No. 35 of 2019.
12. In view of the prayer made by the petitioner, the
Court below is directed to decide the application of the
petitioner for setting aside the ex-parte order/application filed
under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. within two months from the
date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order to the
Court below.
13. The Court below is directed to proceed ex-parte
against the non-cooperating party.
14. Accordingly, this application is disposed of.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…