Patna High Court
Ashok ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Thakur, sought bail in a complaint case alleging offences under Section 498A of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, wherein the complainant claimed mental and physical cruelty and demanded Rs. 2.5 lakh and a motorcycle. The petitioner contended that the complaint was false, filed after 18 years of marriage due to domestic differences and parental instigation, and that no injury was sustained despite an allegation of being set on fire. The counsel highlighted the absence of a supporting affidavit and cited the precedent of Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh, arguing that the case lacked substantive basis. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The High Court, noting the lack of injury, the unsupported affidavit, and the clean antecedent of the petitioner, exercised its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC and ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a complaint under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Act.
- Whether the complaint is false and lacks evidentiary support as required by law.
- Whether the High Court can invoke its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC to grant bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- Section 498A
- false complaint
- domestic violence
- Section 482
- high court inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27256 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - JHANJHARPUR
District- Madhubani
======================================================
Ashok Thakur S/o- Upendra Thakur, R/vill- Tokna Tol PS- Bheja Dist-
Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sumitra Devi W/o- Ashok Thakur R/vill- Tokna Tol PS- Bheja Dist-
Madhubani, Presently Sumitra Devi, D/o Mahendra Thakur, R/o village
Chunni Po- Chunni Ps- Madhepur Dist- Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
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.R.
Case No. 89 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable
under Section 498(A) of the IPC and ¾ of Dowry Act.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is to
commit mental and physical cruelty upon complainant due to
non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, as raised for cash of Rs.
2.5 lacs and one splendor motorcycle.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27256 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioner that due to obvious domestic
differences, upon instigation of parents, the present false
case was lodged against petitioner after 18 years of
marriage, where admittedly complainant averred that
petitioner nothing did wrong with her for long 16 years. It is
submitted that the allegation as raised in paragraph-2
regarding putting this complainant on fire is apparently false,
for the reason that she received no burn injury out of that. It
is submitted that even paragraph-2 suggest that she left her
matrimonial home on her own and joined her parental home
and from there after 10 days, the present false case was
lodged. In this context, it is further submitted that complaint
in issue is not supported by affidavit and, therefore, the
allegation as raised through complaint petition not be
accepted true in view of legal ratio as available through
Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [2015
(6) SCC 287]. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as admittedly the complainant did not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27256 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
receive any injury despite she alleged to put on fire by this
petitioner, coupled with the fact that the allegation not
appears supported through affidavit in terms of Priyanka
Srivastava’s Case (supra), accordingly, above named
petitioner, 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., Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani/concerned Court,
where the case is pending in connection with C.R. Case No.
89 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.