Patna High Court
Md. Ashif AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the complaint's vague and general allegations do not justify denial of bail, and therefore bail was granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Ashif Alam, was charged under Section 85 of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged mental and physical cruelty and demanding a dowry of Rs.5 lakh and a motorcycle. He sought bail, arguing that the complaint lacked an supporting affidavit and contained only vague, general allegations. The prosecution contended that the petitioner, as the husband, was the primary dowry demander. The court examined the complaint and found the allegations to be omnibus and insufficiently specific, referencing the principle in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the BNSS and directed the trial court to consider an amicable settlement.
Issues considered
- Whether the complaint, lacking an affidavit and containing vague allegations, is sufficient to deny bail under Section 85 BNSS and Section 3 D.P. Act.
- Whether the general nature of the allegations warrants the grant of bail to the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- Section 85 BNSS
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- general allegations
- affidavit requirement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27174 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2001 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Katihar
======================================================
Md. Ashif Alam S/o Md. Khurshid Alam, R/o Village - Hasinapur, Siz Tola,
P.S.- Barari, District – Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Asmira Gulab, D/o Md. Afaque R/o Village - Maheshpur, P.O - Shitalmani,
P.S - Azamnagar, District – Katihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing
on behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioner named in complaint
petition and apprehending his arrest in connection with C.A.
Case No. 2001 of 2024 registered for the offences
punishable under Section 85 of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and
Section ¾ of D.P. Act.
3. As per complaint, petitioner alleged to commit
mental and physical cruelty upon the complainant alongwith
his family members including parents due to non-fulfillment
of demand of Rs. 5 lakh and one motorcycle, as demanded
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27174 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
in dowry.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that the complaint in issue is not
supported by affidavit and, therefore, its contents cannot be
believed as same appears in contrary to the legal ratio as
available through Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [2015 (6) SCC 287].
5. Arguing further, an attention of this Court was
drawn towards para nos. 7 and 10 of the complaint petition,
where no specific allegation raised against this petitioner,
rather the allegation qua demanding dowry and also qua
assaulting and abused was raised in a very general and
specific manner against accused person, without specifying
anything. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent
6. Learned APP, duly assisted by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant, while opposing the
prayer of bail submitted that the petitioner is the husband
and he is the main person, who demanded dowry but he
could not disputed the averments as made under para nos. 7
and 10 of the complaint petition.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27174 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as allegation raised against petitioner
is appearing very much general and omnibus in nature, as
discussed aforesaid, accordingly, above named petitioner,
who is the husband of the complainant, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a
period of four weeks of the order, is directed to be released
on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Katihar/concerned
Court, where the case is pending in connection with C.A.
Case No. 2001 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further
condition that:-
The learned trial court is directed to
explore the possibilities of amicable
settlement, if any.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…