Patna High Court
Amit Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties and specific conditions, including a monthly payment of Rs. 3,000, under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482 B.N.S.S.
Summary
Amit Kumar Yadav petitioned the Patna High Court for bail in a complaint case (No. 1049 of 2024) alleging offences under IPC sections 323, 341, 498A and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The petitioner denied the allegations of torture and dowry demand and offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month to his wife, Sunita Devi, as temporary relief. Mediation before the court failed, and the petitioner sought bail to avoid arrest. The court, after hearing counsel for both parties, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including the monthly payment and compliance with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. The order also stipulated that failure to pay for two consecutive months could lead to cancellation of bail, and that the bail would not prejudice any matrimonial or maintenance proceedings.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to the petitioner in a complaint case involving alleged offences under IPC sections 323, 341, 498A and the Dowry Prohibition Act?
- Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay a monthly amount constitutes sufficient assurance to justify bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC
- Criminal Procedure Code
- mediation
- complaint case
- maintenance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45577 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1049 Year-2024 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saran
======================================================
Amit Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Kumar Yadav S/o Bhrigunath Ray @
Bhrigunath Yadav Resident of village- Kopa, P.S.- Kopa, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sunita Devi W/o Amit Kumar Yadav @ Pappu Kumar Yadav, D/o
Rameshwar Prasad Yadav R/o Vill- Kopa, P.S.- Kopa, Distt- Saran, presently
residing at Vill- Chaukhara, P.S.- Kopa, Distt- Saran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rana Ishwar Chandra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Khurshid Anwar, APP
Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv.for OP-2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 08-01-2026 Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was
referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre of Patna High
Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved
through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant /
opposite party no. 2.
3. The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.
2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the
offences under Sections 323, 341, 498(A) of the Indian Penal
Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45577 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
4. Petitioner is alleged to have committed torture and
harassment with opposite party no. 2 for dowry.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner denies the allegation made in the complaint petition
and submits that he never committed torture to opposite party
no. 2 or demanded any dowry. However, the petitioner
undertakes to give Rs. 3,000/- per month by way of temporary
relief/solace, starting from this month, to the opposite party
no.2.
6. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for
the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary
relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) per month
to the opposite party no. 2, in the event of arrest/surrender
within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above-named
petitioner 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 learned S.D.J.M., Saran at Chapra in
connection with Complaint Case No. 1049 of 2024, subject to
the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./
Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. as well as on the following
conditions:-
“(1) Opposite party no. 2 would file an affidavit
before the court below and bring on record her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45577 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
savings bank account number for its
communication to the petitioner.
(2) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid amount
per month in the savings bank account of the
opposite party no. 2.
(3) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the
aforesaid amount for two consecutive months,
the court below would be at liberty to cancel
the bail-bond.
(4) 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)
anay
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.