Patna High Court
Banti KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to strict attendance requirements.
Summary
Banti Kumar was arrested in a complaint alleging that he, along with co‑accused, assaulted his wife Neha Kumari for dowry demands, invoking Sections 323 and 498A of the IPC. The petitioner, a labourer with no prior criminal record, applied for bail, contending that the allegations were false, the marriage dates back to 2015, and he had previously offered a settlement of Rs.1,00,000. The State opposed bail, relying on the FIR allegations. The court noted the matrimonial nature of the dispute, the petitioner’s prolonged custody since 22‑02‑2026, his health condition, and lack of antecedents, and ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to his presence in court on all trial dates. The court also warned that failure to appear on two consecutive dates would lead to cancellation of the bail bond.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Sections 323 and 498A in a matrimonial dowry dispute.
- Whether the petitioner’s health, lack of criminal antecedent, and willingness to cooperate justify bail.
- What conditions are appropriate for bail in such cases.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 205
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- dowry dispute
- IPC 498A
- IPC 323
- CrPC Section 205
- matrimonial dispute
- health condition
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33283 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - MASAURHI
District- Patna
======================================================
Banti Kumar son of Sunil Prasad Resident of village- Sabajpur, Ps-
Phulwarisharif, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Neha Kumari Wife of Banti kumar Resident of village- Lodipur Vasiyawah,
Po- Kanlyanchak, Ps- Pipra, Dist- patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 498A of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along
with other co-accused persons is said to have tortured and
assaulted the opposite party no.2 due to non-fulfillment of
dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the present case arises out of a complaint case in which
cognizance was taken only under the provisions of Sections
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33283 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
498A and 323 of the IPC and the petitioner happens to be the
husband of the complainant and false allegations of subjecting
her to cruelty was levelled against him. It is further submitted
that the marriage takes back to the year 2015 and two children
were born out of the wedlock. It has also been pointed out that
it was the complainant (wife), who had left the matrimonial
household and the petitioner had once undertaken to make a
payment of Rs.1,00,000/- as one time settlement between the
parties for which he had been released from jail custody
provisionally for a period of three months. However, since the
petitioner is a labourer and is working as a Cleaner in road side
Food Stall, he was unable to manage the money, as such, he
was subsequently taken back into custody. The petitioner was
not able to surrender earlier on account of his bad medical
condition and had made an application under Section 205 of
the Cr.P.C., which was rejected. The petitioner is now in
custody since 22.02.2026.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of
bail on the basis of allegations made in the First Information
Report.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and considering the fact that the case arises out of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33283 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
a matrimonial dispute and the petitioner has remained in
custody since 22.02.2026 and also undertakes to cooperate in
the trial, let the above named petitioner, who has not criminal
antecedent and charge-sheet having been submitted, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Masaurhi/concerned Court below in connection with Complaint
Case No. 44(C) of 2022.
7. It is further noticed that the petitioner remained
absconding for some time and caused delay in the progress of
the case, in such view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to
remain physically present in court on each and every date during
trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without
sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled
by the learned court concerned.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
anand/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.