Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ketan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court directed the respondent to pay the remaining Rs.1,50,000 as per the bail condition, thereby modifying the anticipatory bail order.

Summary

The petitioner, Ketan Kumar, sought modification of an anticipatory bail order granted to Anita Devi on 08-09-2025, alleging that she had complied with only part of the payment condition stipulated in the order. The original order required Anita Devi to pay Rs.15,000 immediately and the remaining Rs.1,50,000 at the time of furnishing a bail bond. While she paid the first amount via demand draft, she failed to pay the balance or furnish the bail bond. The petitioner requested that the court insert this non‑compliance into the bail order and enforce the remaining payment. The court held that Anita Devi must comply with the second payment condition and directed her to pay the outstanding Rs.1,50,000 before furnishing the bail bond. Consequently, the application for modification was disposed of with the said direction.

Issues considered

  • Whether the anticipatory bail order can be modified to enforce the unpaid portion of the stipulated payment condition
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the respondent to pay the remaining amount before furnishing the bail bond

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • modification of order
  • bail conditions
  • payment of security
  • criminal miscellaneous

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3124 of 2026
                                              In
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72124 of 2024
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2023 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Ketan Kumar S/o Late Radhey Shyam Prasad R/o Village- Company Sarai,
                 Rauza Road, Kalisthan Ward NO 12, PS- Sasaram, District- Rohtas

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Anita Devi W/o Ram Bachan Singh Resident OF Ward NO 13, Udhopur
                 Targanj, P.S- Sasaram, District- Rohtas

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Singh
                 For the State           :       Ms. Sharda Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
                 PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-01-2026                   Heard the parties.

                                 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that O.P. No.

                   2 was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 08.09.2025 in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 72124 of 2024 on the ground that the matter has been

                   resolved between the parties according to the terms and conditions

                   mentioned in the report of mediator dated 29.08.2025.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   according to condition no. 2, O.P. No. 2 had to make a payment of

                   Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) to which, the O.P. No. 2 has

                   complied with by handing over a demand Draft of Rs. 15,000/- to the

                   petitioner vide Demand Draft No. 017773 dated 28.08.2025. The

                   second part of the condition mentioned in paragraph no. 2 of the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3124 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       settlement was that O.P. No. 2 shall make payment of rest amount of

                       Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand) at the time of

                       furnishing of the bail bond.

                                    4. Till date, the O.P. No. 2 herein (petitioner of Cr. Misc.

                       No. 72124 of 2024) did not make payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees

                       One Lakh Fifty Thousand) nor has furnished her bail bond.

                                    5. Learned counsel has submitted that by modifying the

                       order dated 08.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 72124 of 2024, this fact

                       should be inserted in that order.

                                    6.   Considering       the    above    mentioned   facts   and

                       circumstances, the prayer is allowed. The O.P. No. 2 herein (the

                       petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 72124 of 2024) is directed to comply with

                       the second part of the condition no. 2 of terms and condition by

                       making payment of rest amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the petitioners

                       herein (the O.P. No. 2 in Cr. Misc. No. 72124 of 2024) at the time of

                       furnishing bail bond.

                                    7. With the aforesaid direction/observation, the present

                       modification application stands disposed of.


                                            (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

priyanka/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.