Patna High Court
Mantu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to regular bail subject to a bond, sureties and a condition of mediation.
Summary
Mantu Rai was arrested in a complaint case alleging offences under several IPC sections including 498A and an attempted murder, as well as a violation of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complainant, his wife Priya Devi, claimed cruelty, dowry demands for a bike and a colour TV, assault, ouster from the matrimonial home and an attempt to kill her. The petitioner pleaded innocence, asserted that the matter was a matrimonial dispute, had no prior criminal record and had been in custody since 21‑04‑2026, and refused to keep his wife. The State opposed bail, while the petitioner’s counsel relied on Supreme Court judgments cautioning against the misuse of Section 498A. After hearing both sides, the court, noting the Supreme Court’s observations, decided to grant regular bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and conditioned the release on the parties’ settlement through the Chapra Mediation Centre. The bail order was issued by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the charges including 498A and attempted murder
- Whether the alleged misuse of Section 498A as highlighted by Supreme Court precedents affects the bail decision
- Whether the condition of mediation is appropriate for securing the petitioner’s release
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 341, 379, 494, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 498A
- dowry harassment
- matrimonial dispute
- mediation
- criminal procedure
- misuse of law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41949 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-984 Year-2021 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saran
======================================================
Mantu Rai S/O Lagandeo Rai @ Lagan Dev Yadav R/O Village- Lerua, P.S.-
Maharajganj, Distt.- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priya Devi D/O Lal Bahadur Rai, W/O Mantu Rai R/O Village- Auli Gachhi,
P.S.- Rivilganj, Distt.- Saran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 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 Sections 341, 323,
379, 498(A), 494, 307, 504/506 of I.P.C. and Section ¾ of
Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
complainant was married to this petitioner in year 2015. It is
further alleged that she was subjected to cruelty on account of
non-fulfillment of dowry demand of a bike and Colour
Television. She has also a daughter out of the wedlock. After
that, the behavior of her in-laws became more torturous. They
started her assaulting. It is further alleged that on 20.12.2018,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41949 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
she was ousted from the matrimonial house and was threatened
that if bike and Colour T.V. were not provided to them then
they will not permit her to enter in the matrimonial house. A
Panchayati was also held. It is also alleged that an attempt was
made to kill the complainant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
actually, the petitioner has been deserted by the complainant. It
has further been submitted that it is a matrimonial dispute.
Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 21.04.2026.
5. On being asked, as to whether the petitioner is
ready to keep his wife, the learned counsel for the petitioner has
blatantly refused.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred the
judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar
v. The State of Bihar and Satender Kumar Antil v. Central
Bureau of Investigation. The Hon’ble Apex Court has held in
the case of Arnesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar which is being
given hereunder:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41949 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
“Section 498-A of the IPC was introduced with
avowed object to combat the menace of harassment
to a woman at the hands of her husband and his
relatives. The fact that Section 498-A is a
cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a
dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that
are used as weapons rather than shield by
disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to
get the husband and his relatives arrested under
this provision.”
7. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the application for bail.
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
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
S.D.J.M., Saran at Chapra in connection with Complaint Case
No. 984 of 2021 with the condition that the petitioner and
the complainant shall settle their dispute before the
Mediation Centre of Chapra.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.