Patna High Court
Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court ordered interim protection and directed mediation, granting conditional pre‑arrest bail pending the outcome of the mediation process.
Summary
Petitioner Rajesh Kumar applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case alleging offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 110, 351, 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, stemming from a matrimonial dispute in which he is accused of demanding Rs 8 lakh from the informant’s parents and allegedly torturing her. The petitioner claimed innocence and sought bail, while the informant and the State suggested an amicable settlement. The Court directed that the parties appear before the District Court for mediation on 19‑02‑2026 and ordered interim protection for the petitioner, with bail to be granted conditionally by the District Court if mediation succeeds. If the petitioner fails to appear, the interim protection would lapse; otherwise, the trial would proceed. The application was ultimately disposed with the mediation directive and conditional bail provision.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted in a criminal case arising from a matrimonial dispute involving alleged dowry demands and assault.
- Whether the Court can condition bail on the parties’ participation in mediation before a District Court.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- mediation
- matrimonial dispute
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- conditional bail
- family dispute
- interim protection
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44607 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2025 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada
======================================================
Rajesh Kumar, aged about 30 years (Male), S/O Musafir Yadav, Resident of
Village- Taropur Tola, Kyapur, P.S- Narhat, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kumari Kiran D/O Kuleshwar Prasad R/O Village- Bhelwatand, P.S-
Sirdalla, Distt.- Nawada.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Rajeev Kumar,
learned counsel for the complainant and Mr. Nagendra Prasad,
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Narhat P.S. Case No. 41 of 2025, registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 110, 351,
3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the marriage
of the complainant was solemnized with the petitioner on as per
Hindu Rites and Custom. After some time of marriage,
petitioner and his other family members, had started demanding
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44607 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
rupees eight lac from the parent of the informant and due to
non-fulfillment of the same, they had subjected the informant to
various sorts of torture and ousted her from her matrimonial
house.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that
petitioner always tries to lead a peaceful married life with the
informant but she never co-operates with him on the instigation
of her family members. Learned counsel further submitted that
marriage is a sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish
suddenly erupts into hatred and the parties ponder to reconcile
their dispute outside the court.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant opposing the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail
submitted that an opportunity may be given to the parties to
resolve their dispute amicably outside the Court.
6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
7. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the
respective parties, on instruction, submitted that the parties have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44607 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on 19.02.2026 for resolving the dispute by way of mediation.
8. Heard the parties.
10. The parties have willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on 19.02.2026, so that the
matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
11. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator
of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for appearance
of the parties to give effect to Mediation 2.0.
12. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned upon appearance of the parties on the fixed date shall
make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and
thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned
District Court, well within a period of four months, till then, no
coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in
connection with the aforesaid case.
13. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court, the petitioner is required to be released on pre-
arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District
Court deems it fit and proper.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44607 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
14. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 19.02.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its force.
15. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the opposite
party no.2 to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall continue and the trial shall
proceed in accordance with law.
16. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
17. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…