Patna High Court
Rupesh Kumar KarnversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bail bond and compliance with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Summary
Rupesh Kumar Karn, husband of the informant, filed an anticipatory bail petition in the Patna High Court fearing arrest in a dowry harassment case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution alleged that Karn and other accused tortured the informant for non‑payment of dowry. Karn contended that the case stemmed from a petty family dispute, he has a clean antecedent, and the matter is triable by a magistrate, relying on the precedent of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari v. State of Bihar. The State opposed the bail, but the Court, after considering the facts and the cited judgment, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order also stipulated that if arrested within eight weeks, Karn would be released on bail on the stated conditions. The petition was thereby disposed in favour of the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged dowry harassment under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the offence is triable by a magistrate and the applicability of Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of a family dispute and clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 82(1), 85, 89
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3633 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Rupesh Kumar Karn Son of Bachchan kumar Karn Resident of village
-Barkurba P.s-Kalyanpur Dist -Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Puja Kumari @ Pooja Dutta Daughter of Surendra Kumar Dutta Resident of
village - Barhata, Ps- Bahadurpur, Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 07-05-2026 Despite valid service of notice, none appears on
behalf of the opposite party no. 2.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
State.
3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 89, 126(2), 82(1),
115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and
Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. As per prosecution case, all the named accused
persons including this petitioner tortured and harassed the
informant for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
5. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner
happens to be husband of the informant and present case has
been lodged due to petty family dispute. There is general and
omnibus allegation of commission of assault against him. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3633 of 2026(4) dt.07-05-2026
2/2
further submitted that petitioner is ready to keep the informant,
as his wife, with full honour and dignity. It is next submitted
that the case is triable by the Magistrate. In this connection,
petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors.
Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.
Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the
above named petitioner, in the event of his 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, Darbhanga in connection
with Darbhanga Mahila, P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025, subject to
condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.