Patna High Court
Noorbas AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that non‑payment of the maintenance condition does not justify cancellation of bail and granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Noorbas Ansari, charged under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 504, 506, 379/34 of the IPC and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, sought regular bail after his anticipatory bail was conditioned on paying Rs.4,500 per month as maintenance to the informant, his wife. He was unable to make the payments and the trial court rejected his bail bonds, leading to his continued custody since 10‑12‑2025. The petitioner argued that non‑payment of the maintenance condition should not justify cancellation of bail, especially as no family court order on maintenance existed and he has no prior criminal record. The High Court considered the facts, the purpose of bail, and the lack of a maintenance order, and decided to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail. He was ordered to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, without imposing the earlier maintenance condition.
Issues considered
- Whether failure to comply with a maintenance condition attached to anticipatory bail warrants cancellation of bail
- Whether regular bail can be granted despite non‑payment of the maintenance amount
- Whether the absence of a family court maintenance order affects bail considerations
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 379/34, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- maintenance
- dowry harassment
- IPC 498A
- criminal procedure
- family law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40973 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2022 Thana- RAJPUR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Noorbas Ansari S/o- Late Jamaluddin Ansaari R/v- Mangrawalya Ps- Rajpur
Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sabnam Khatoon D/o- Jainual Haquue Ansahari R/v- Turkwaliya Ps- Rajpur
Dist- Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 498(A), 341,
323, 504, 506, 379/34 of the I.P.C. and Sections ¾ of D.P. Act.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that earlier the petitioner has been granted
anticipatory bail by learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 17.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 80773 of 2023
with an observation that he shall pay Rs. 4,500/- per month to
the informant towards her maintenance till disposal of the case
before the learned trial Court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40973 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that as the petitioner is a poor man, he could not pay
the maintenance for few months.
5. As per the case of the prosecution, the petitioner is
the husband of the informant and the allegation against the
petitioner and other accused persons is that they have subjected
the informant to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of dowry
demand of bike and cash.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that as he could not pay the maintenance amount as ordered by
the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court, learned trial Court
has rejected his bail bonds.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that though he was not able to pay the maintenance
despite that, this cannot be the ground for the cancellation of
bail. It has further been submitted that no order regarding
maintenance has been passed from any learned Family Court.
Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 10.12.2025.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40973 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj (Rohtas) in
connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 107 of 2022.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.