Patna High Court
Mohammad Reyaz @ GoldenversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
Since the allegations are general and omnibus and the complaint is not supported by an affidavit, the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Summary
Petitioner Mohammad Reyaz was named in a complaint (Case No. 411 of 2023) alleging offences under IPC sections 448, 323, 498A, 389 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4 for alleged mental and physical cruelty linked to a dowry demand of Rs. 2 lakh. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the complaint was vague, omnibus and not backed by an affidavit, citing the Supreme Court precedent in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The State opposed the bail. The Court observed that the allegations were indeed general, the complaint lacked an affidavit, and therefore the petitioner was not likely to be arrested without further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and directed the trial court to explore possible compromise.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious allegations under IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act
- Whether the complaint, being unsupported by an affidavit and described as general and omnibus, justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 389, 448, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- general and omnibus allegations
- affidavit requirement
- criminal procedure
- compromise
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27241 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - SHERGHATI
District- Gaya
======================================================
Mohammad Reyaz @ Golden S/o- Md. Rizwan Resident Of Village- Mohali
Dih Tand, Po- Bhuli, Ps- Tetulmari, Dist-Dhanbad
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pammi Parveen D/o- Late Md. Hasin R/v- Gajragarh Po Ps- Barachatti Dist-
Gaya
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the complaint, is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.
411 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 448, 323, 498A, 389 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per complaint, petitioner alongwith family
members alleged to commit mental and physical cruelty upon
the complainant due to non-fulfillment of additional demand of
dowry as raised for cash of Rs. 2 Lakhs.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that allegation as raised through complaint cannot be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27241 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
legally viewed as same not appears supported by affidavit in
view of the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available
through Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [2015 (6)
SCC 287].
5. During course of argument, learned counsel drawn
attention of this Court towards para 5 of the complaint petition
where on 13.04.2023 the complainant was ousted from her
matrimonial home by the accused/petitioner, where allegation of
assault and demanding dowry appears very much general and
omnibus in nature including this petitioner. Same is also
regarding occurrence dated 15.06.2023 which alleged to be
taken place in matrimonial home of the complainant. Petitioner
claimed clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as allegation qua raising demand of
dowry, assault and committing cruelty appearing very much
general and omnibus against the petitioner being husband,
coupled with the fact that complaint in issue also not appears
supported by affidavit, accordingly, above-named petitioner, in
the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks
from this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27241 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
J.M. -1st Class, Sherghati, Gaya/concerned court in connection
with Complaint Case No. 411 of 2023, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2)
of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
8. Learned trial court is directed to explore the
possibility of compromise, if any, between the parties during the
trial.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…