Patna High Court
Sidharth Kumar @ Siddharth Kumar BhartiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, subject to bail bond, sureties and a monthly maintenance condition.
Summary
The petitioner, Sidharth Kumar Bharti, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry‑related complaint (Case No. 501 of 2020) that alleged offences under several IPC sections and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, assaulted and tortured the victim to demand dowry. The petitioner pleaded innocence, asserted a clean record, and applied for anticipatory bail. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the High Court granted anticipatory bail, imposing a bail bond, two sureties, and a condition to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 5,000 to the complainant, subject to the family court’s decision. The order also warned that non‑compliance could lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the principles laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar are applicable to restrain unnecessary arrest.
- Whether the court can impose a maintenance payment condition as part of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 379, 494, 498A, 504/34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC offences
- Section 438 CrPC
- maintenance order
- Arnesh Kumar principle
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38773 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2020 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Gaya
======================================================
Sidharth Kumar @ Siddharth Kumar Bharti S/O- Surajdeo Paswan Resident
of Village- Chaurhar Tola Ramgarh, Civil Aerodrum, P.S.- Magadh Medical
College, Dist- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Usha Kumari D/O- Dilip Paswan R/O Vill.- Dusadh Bigaha, P.S.- Konch,
District- Gayaji
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No. 501 of 2020 in which the cognizance
has been taken under Sections 341, 323, 379, 494, 498(A),
504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the DP Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
others are accused of assaulting and torturing the victim for
demand of dowry.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been
implicated in this case. The petitioner claims clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38773 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
He further submits that the petitioner is ready to keep her wife
with full honour and dignity.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submission of the parties and in
light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8
SCC 273, this application for grant of anticipatory bail is
allowed.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within four
weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court
below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection
with Complaint Case No. 501 of 2020 subject to the conditions
laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 / Section 482 of the BNSS and with further condition that:
(I). The petitioner is directed to pay
a maintenance amount of Rs. 5000/- from the
month of June 2026 to the
complainant/informant. The maintenance for the
month of June 2026 shall be paid to the
complainant/informant within ten days from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38773 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
today, and thereafter, the maintenance amount
shall be paid to the complainant/informant
every month before the 10th day of each month.
8. It is made clear that the order of maintenance
passed by this Court shall be subject to the outcome of the
maintenance case in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court
concerned, if any.
9. Needless to state that, if the petitioner fails to abide
by the terms and conditions, as stated hereinabove, the State
shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application, before the
learned concerned Court below for cancellation of bail granted
to the petitioner.
10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Gayaji through FAX for its
compliance forthwith.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.