Patna High Court
Ashok Chaudhary @ Ashok Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, despite the prior breach, considering the circumstances and pending matters.
Summary
Ashok Chaudhary was charged under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 379, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for allegedly demanding dowry and assaulting his wife, Rubi Kumari, resulting in her hospitalization. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail with a condition to pay Rs.5,000 per month as maintenance, which he allegedly violated, leading to cancellation of his bail and custody from 26 January 2026. The petitioner sought regular bail, claiming innocence and that the allegations were false, while the State and the informant opposed bail on grounds of prior bail violation and non‑payment of maintenance. The court considered the seriousness of the offences, the breach of the earlier bail condition, and the pending maintenance case, and decided to release the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and specific conditions including attendance in court and mediation in the maintenance matter. The order also directed the petitioner to appear before the Family Court for mediation and warned of consequences for non‑appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite violation of the condition of his earlier anticipatory bail order
- Whether the seriousness of the dowry‑related offences warrants denial of bail
- Whether the pending maintenance case and alleged non‑payment affect the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 480(3)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 379, 498A, 504, 506/34
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- anticipatory bail
- maintenance
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- violation of bail conditions
- family law
- mediation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32366 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2019 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya
======================================================
Ashok Chaudhary @ Ashok Kumar Chaudhary S/o Mathura Chaudhary
Resident of Village - Maher, P.S. Tankuppa, District - Gaya ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rubi Kumari W/o Ashok Choudhary Resident of Village - Maher, P.S.
Tankuppa in the District of Gaya Ji.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Manoj Vatsal, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
For O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Bishwanath Mahto, Advocate
Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant-opposite party no. 2.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 10 of 2019 registered
for the alleged offences under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 379,
504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32366 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/5
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner married
with opposite party no. 2 and the allegation against the
petitioner and other co-accused persons is that they had been
demanding Rs.One lakh in dowry and tortured the informant. In
one such assault the informant received injury and was even
hospitalized.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. No occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken
place. The petitioner earlier approached this Court for grant of
anticipatory bail and he was given privilege of anticipatory bail
vide order dated 26.11.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 45879 of
2019. Thereafter, the order was modified vide order dated
07.07.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6393 of 2020. However, one
of the conditions was that the petitioner was to make payment of
Rs.5,000/- per month to the informant towards her maintenance.
For violation of the said condition, the bail bond of the
petitioner was cancelled and he was taken in custody on
26.01.2026. Learned counsel further submits that the imposing
condition of payment of maintenance amount at the time of
considering of prayer for bail was held to be irrelevant by
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Srikant Kumar @ Shrikant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32366 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/5
Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar in SLP (Crl.) No. 13083 of 2023.
Learned counsel further submits that the allegations are false
and concocted and the petitioner is ready to keep his wife with
honour and dignity. The petitioner is having antecedent of two
criminal cases of similar nature. The petitioner is in custody
since 16.01.2026 and charge sheet has been submitted.
05. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the informant-opposite party no. 2 vehemently
oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned
counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner has earlier
violated the terms of earlier bail order allowing him the
privilege of anticipatory bail and therefore, the petitioner does
not deserve any sympathy. Learned counsel further submits that
the petitioner is not genuinely interested in settlement and has
solemnized another marriage. Learned counsel further submits
that the petitioner did not take care of the informant or their son
and has not paid any maintenance amount to them though the
informant has already filed Maintenance Case No. 96 of 2019 in
the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gayaji.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
period of custody of the petitioner and submission of charge
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32366 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
4/5
sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on
bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya Ji/concerned
Court in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 10 of 2019,
subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of
B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present
on each and every date fixed by the
court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three
consecutive dates or in violation of the
terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
07. However, the petitioner will appear in
Maintenance Case No. 96 of 2019 before the learned Principal
Judge, Family Court, Gaya Ji and the learned Family Court is
directed to refer the matter of the petitioner and the informant to
a learned Mediator for exploring the possibility of settlement
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32366 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
5/5
and if the petitioner fails to appear before the learned Family
Court, action would be taken against the petitioner by the said
Court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.