Patna High Court
Pintu Mahto @ Pintu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties and a condition to deposit Rs. 3,000 per month in the complainant’s account.
Summary
Petitioner Pintu Mahto sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a dowry harassment case (IPC sections 341, 323, 379, 498A, 34 and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act) arising from a complaint that he left his wife at a railway station after a dowry demand for a motorcycle. The petitioner denied any dowry demand or assault, stating that the wife is quarrelsome and that he has already filed a divorce suit. He offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as living expenses to the wife, an offer accepted by her counsel. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000, two sureties, and the condition that the petitioner deposit Rs. 3,000 monthly in the wife’s bank account, invoking its inherent powers under CrPC Section 482(2).
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case under the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s offer to pay a monthly sum to the complainant influences the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 379, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Section 498A
- Section 482
- maintenance
- marital dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36794 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1443 Year-2024 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saran
======================================================
Pintu Mahto @ Pintu Kumar S/o- Mangal Mahto Village - Behldi Gachhi
Tola, P. S - Bheldi, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nisha Devi @ Nisha Mahto W/o- Pintu Mahto Village- Narharpur Ps- Gaura
Dist- Saran A/P- Kona Pailat Bagan Purbapara Po- Kona Ps- Lilua Dist-
Hawara W.B
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hemant Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
6 07-04-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Inquiry No. 18 / 24 dated 28.05.2024 arising out of Saran
Complaint Case No. 1443 / 2024 registered under section 341,
323, 379, 498(A)/ 34 of the I.P.C. and Section ¾ of the D.P. Act.
3. The prosecution case in short is that the marriage of the
complainant was solemnized with the petitioner according to
Hindu rites and rituals on 26.01.2020. It is alleged that the
father-in-law of the complainant demanded a Splendor
motorcycle and due to non fulfillment of the demand, on
25.06.2022 the petitioner left the complainant at Chhapra
Bhagwan Bazar Junction and said to make arrangement for a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36794 of 2025(6) dt.07-04-2026
2/4
motorcycle or else he would perform second marriage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is
innocent and he has not committed any offence in the manner
alleged and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further
submits that the complainant is a quarrelsome lady and acts as
per the direction of her parents and does not want to live with
her in-laws. The petitioner has already filed a Matrimonial Suit
(Divorce Case) bearing Matrimonial Suit No. 1275 / 2023.
before the Principal Judge, Saran. He next submits that neither
any dowry demand has been made from the complainant by the
petitioner or any of his family members nor the complainant has
been subjected to any type of assault or torture at any point of
time. However, without prejudice to the right and contention of
the petitioner and in order to maintain harmony in the family,
the petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month
to the opposite party no. 2 as “living cost” subject to final
outcome of the present case as well as matrimonial case and /
or maintenance case filed and decided between the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant / opposite party no. 2
submits that complainant has been given ill-treatment by the
petitioner and the in-laws and now she is at the verge of
starvation. However, he accepts the offer so made by learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36794 of 2025(6) dt.07-04-2026
3/4
counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner may be
directed to deposit the said amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month in
the bank account of the complainant / opposite party no. 2,
details of which shall be furnished by learned counsel for the
opposite party no. 2 to learned counsel for the petitioner within
ten days from today.
6. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact
that offer made by learned counsel for the petitioner has been
accepted by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 , as
such, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest /
surrender before the learned court below within a period of six
weeks from today be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saran at
Chapra in connection with Saran Complaint Case No. 1443 /
2024 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following condition:-
(i) that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of
Rs. 3,000/- per month in the bank account of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36794 of 2025(6) dt.07-04-2026
4/4
opposite party no. 2 positively by the 7th day of
every month starting from the month of May,
2026.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…