Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Akhilesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar, was accused under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged cruelty and dowry demands after his marriage in 2021. He applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that he was ready to provide the complainant Rs 3,000 per month as temporary relief, subject to any maintenance order. The court noted that mediation had failed and, considering the petitioner's undertaking, allowed the anticipatory bail application. The bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, the deposit of the monthly amount into the complainant’s savings account, and cancellation if two consecutive payments are missed. The order also clarified that the bail does not preclude resolution of the matrimonial dispute through other proceedings.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to a person accused under Sections 498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act?
  • Whether the petitioner's undertaking to pay a monthly amount influences the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • dowry harassment
  • IPC 498A
  • Dowry Prohibition Act
  • maintenance
  • matrimonial dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3874 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-511 Year-2023 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                         Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Akhilesh Kumar S/o Basudev Sahni Resident of Village- Sadhuapur,
                 Rghunathpur, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District - Vaishali

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Suman Kumari W/o Akhilesh Kumar D/o Shambhu sahani, R/o Village -
                 Rupanpatti, P.S - Baligaon, District - Vaishali

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Shantanu Kumar, A.P.P.
                 For the O.P. No. 2       :      Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   22-06-2026                  Earlier, vide order dated 19.03.2026, 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 Sections 498(A)/34 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 2021. Thereafter,

                   it is alleged that complainant was subjected to torture and

                   cruelty due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3874 of 2026(6) dt.22-06-2026
                                            2/3




                       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,

          Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 511

          of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section

          482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita as well as on

          the following conditions:-

                       ‘(1) Complainant would file an affidavit before the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3874 of 2026(6) dt.22-06-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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.