Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

RUPESH MAHTOversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties, and specific conditions including monthly interim relief payments.

Summary

The petitioners, Rupesh Mahto and Bhupesh Mahto, sought bail for Rupesh, who is charged under sections 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged dowry harassment and cruelty. The prosecution alleged that Rupesh and others demanded Rs. 3 lakh as dowry, assaulted the wife (Seema Kumari) when the demand was not met, and evicted her from the matrimonial home. Rupesh’s counsel denied the allegations, claimed innocence, and offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as interim relief to the wife. The State and the wife opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner continued to harass and deprive her of livelihood. The court, noting the petitioner’s undertaking and the wife’s willingness to receive interim relief, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, including monthly payments and possible cancellation for non‑compliance.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case involving alleged dowry harassment under IPC sections 498A and 34.
  • Whether the imposition of interim monetary relief and other conditions is appropriate to safeguard the interests of the complainant while bail is pending.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • dowry harassment
  • IPC 498A
  • bail
  • interim relief
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
  • criminal procedure
  • marital dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41953 of 2024
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
           1.     RUPESH MAHTO S/O BAJRANGI MAHTO R/O VILLAGE- GADHI
                  BISHANPUR, P.S- PIRIBAZAR, DISTT.- LAKHISARAI.
           2.    BHUPESH MAHTO @ BADAL @ BHUPESH KUMAR S/O BAJRANGI
                 MAHTO R/O VILLAGE- GADHI BISHANPUR, P.S- PIRIBAZAR,
                 DISTT.- LAKHISARAI.

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    THE STATE OF BIHAR
           2.    SEEMA KUMARI W/O RUPESH MAHTO, D/O VARN MAHTO R/O
                 VILLAGE- GADHI BISHANPUR, P.S- PRIIBAZAR, DISTT.-
                 LAKHISARAI, PRESENT ADDRESS- RESIDENCE OF VILLAGE-
                 BASAUNI, P.S- PIRIBAZAR, DISTT.- LAKHISARAI.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.
                                                  Puja Arya, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   05-02-2026                     Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was
                   referred to Mediation & Conciliation Center of Patna High
                   Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved
                   through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed
                   (Report kept at flag ‘M’).
                                2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State
                   and the opposite party no.2.
                                3. The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party
                   no.2, apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence
                   punishable under sections 498A/34 and other allied sections of
                   the Indian Penal Code.
                                4. Prosecution case in brief is that opposite party no.2
                   was married with the petitioner in 2015. After marriage, this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41953 of 2024(4) dt.05-02-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner along with other accused persons started demanding
          Rs. 3 lacs as dowry and on non-fulfillment of the same they
          used to assault and torture her. Lastly, accused persons ousted
          opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house.
                       5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while
          denying the allegations, submits that the petitioner is innocent
          and has falsely been implicated in this case because he happens
          to be husband of opposite party no.2. Petitioner is ready to keep
          her with honour and safety. Besides this, petitioner is ready to
          give Rs. 3000/-per month to opposite party no.2 by way of
          temporary relief/solace, starting from this month, subject to any
          order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected
          proceedings.
                       6. Learned counsel for the State as well as opposite
          party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for
          opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner, being husband of
          opposite party no.2, in connivance with his family members,
          subjected her to harassment and cruelty for non-fulfillment of
          demand of dowry and also ousted her to her parents’ house. It is
          further submitted that she has no means of livelihood and is on
          the verge of starvation.
                       7. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for
          the petitioner as well as condition of opposite party no.2, in the
          event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from
          today, let the petitioner, above-named, 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 the Chief
          Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai in Mahila Police Station Case
          No. 89/2023, subject to the conditions laid down under section
          482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as well as
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41953 of 2024(4) dt.05-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on the following conditions:-
                                    (i) Opposite party no.2. would file an affidavit before
                       the court below and bring on record her saving bank account
                       number for its communication to the petitioner.
                                    (ii) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid interim
                       relief per month in the saving bank account of the opposite party
                       no.2.
                                    (iii) In case, petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid
                       amount of temporary relief/solace for two consecutive months,
                       the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.
                                    (iv) 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)
Shashi

U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.