Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vikas Kumar @ Vikash Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Vikas Kumar, was accused under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged cruelty and dowry harassment by his wife. The matter was referred to mediation, which failed, leading the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail fearing arrest. He denied the allegations and offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as temporary maintenance, subject to any future matrimonial orders. The Court, noting the petitioner’s undertaking, allowed the anticipatory bail application with a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, imposing conditions for monthly payments and cancellation on default. The order also required the complainant to file an affidavit disclosing her bank account details for the deposits.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act?
  • Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay maintenance suffices to justify bail?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 498A
  • dowry harassment
  • maintenance
  • mediation
  • bail conditions
  • family law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3231 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-982 Year-2019 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
                                                District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Vikas Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Gupta S/o Nandlal Sah Resident of Village-
                 Bada Pareua, P.S.- Raxaul, Dist.- East Champaran

                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Ranjana Kumari W/o Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Gupta, D/o Kanhaiya
                 Prasad Resident of Mohalla- Hospital Road, Near Kalibabu ke Dawakhana,
                 Ganj No. 02, Ward No. 25, P.S.- Bettiah Town, Dist.- West Champaran

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :   Mr. Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.
                 For the O.P. No.2        :   Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   29-06-2026                  Earlier, vide order dated 29.01.2026, the matter was

                   referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High

                   Court, Patna, but as per the Mediator’s Report (flag ‘M’), the

                   mediation has failed.

                                2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered

                   for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian

                   Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

                                4. As per prosecution case, marriage of complainant

                   was solemnized with this petitioner in the year 2014. Thereafter,

                   it is alleged that complainant was subjected to torture and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3231 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                            2/3




          cruelty due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while denying

          the allegations levelled against him, submits that petitioner, who

          is husband of the complainant, is ready to keep her with honour

          and safety. Besides this, petitioner is ready to give Rs. 3000/-

          per month to the complainant by way of temporary relief/solace,

          starting from this month, subject to any order passed in

          matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

                       6. In view of the aforesaid undertaking of learned

          counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give Rs.

          3000/- per month to the complainant by way of temporary

          relief/solace, starting from this month, this anticipatory bail

          application is allowed.

                       7. Let the above-named petitioner, in the event of

          arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be

          enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten

          thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

          Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Complaint Case

          No. 982 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down under

          Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita as

          well as on the following conditions:-
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3231 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026
                                                          3/3




                                     ‘(1) Complainant would file an affidavit before the

                        court below and bring on record her savings bank account

                        number for its communication to the petitioner.

                                     (2)    Petitioner       would          deposit   the   aforesaid

                        maintenance amount per month in the savings bank account of

                        the complainant.

                                     (3) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the

                        maintenance amount for two consecutive months, the court

                        below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.

                                     (4) The aforementioned payment will be subject to

                        any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected

                        proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the

                        parties to resolve the issue otherwise.’



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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