Patna High Court
Manjesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The modification petition is dismissed as the court lacks jurisdiction to alter the interim maintenance condition.
Summary
The petitioner, Manjesh Kumar, filed a petition seeking modification of an anticipatory bail order dated 18‑09‑2024, which required him to pay Rs 5,000 per month as interim maintenance to the complainant, Nibha Kumari. He contended that he was making the payments but the complainant did not wish to cohabit with him and that he could no longer afford the amount. The court observed that the direction to pay maintenance was only interim and that the substantive maintenance issue must be decided by the appropriate civil court after a full trial. Consequently, the High Court held that it lacks jurisdiction to alter the maintenance condition in the bail order. The modification petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can modify the interim maintenance condition imposed in an anticipatory bail order
- Whether the maintenance dispute can be decided by the criminal court or must be referred to a civil court
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- maintenance
- modification of order
- jurisdiction
- interim relief
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40611 of 2025
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6703 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-320 Year-2019 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - SHERGHATI
District- Gaya
======================================================
Manjesh Kumar S/O Nanhku Chaudhary R/O Village- Mau, P.O- Mau, P.S-
Tekari (Mau), Distt.- Gaya (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nibha Kumari W/O Manjesh Kumar, D/O Sadhu Sharan Chaudhary At
present Residing at Village- Gulani, P.S- Gurua, Distt.- Gaya ( Bihar).
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjeet Tiwary, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. This petition has been filed for modification of
order dated 18.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6703 of 2024 by
a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court whereby the
petitioner was granted anticipatory bail with a condition to pay
Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) per month, as interim
solace/maintenance, in the bank account of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
compliance of aforesaid order, petitioner is regularly paying
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40611 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
2/2
aforesaid amount in the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2
but the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 does not wants to live
with this petitioner and petitioner is not in a position to pay Rs.
5,000/- every month and, therefore, he prays that the order dated
18.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6703 of 2024 be modified,
so far as payment of Rs. 5,000/-, as maintenance, is concerned.
4. This Court, while allowing pre-arrest bail to the
petitioner vide order dated 18.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
6703 of 2024, on the submission of petitioner himself, had
directed him to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as interim
relief/solace to Opposite Party No.2 with observation that the
aforesaid payment will be subject to any order passed in the
maintenance case for final settlement. The issue of maintenance
cannot be decided by this Court. It can only be decided by the
concerned Court at the stage of trial after giving full opportunity
to both the parties and as such, the modification petition cannot
be allowed on this ground alone.
5. Accordingly, this modification petition is
dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…