Patna High Court
Devendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The anticipatory bail application was rejected as the petitioner had absconded and failed to fulfill the conditions of the earlier bail order.
Summary
The petitioner, Devendra Kumar, was charged in 2016 under Sections 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 75 of the D.P. Act based on a complaint by Soni Kumari. An earlier anticipatory bail was granted in 2016 on conditions of restoring matrimonial harmony, the informant’s willingness to reconcile, or the informant’s failure to appear. The petitioner failed to comply with those conditions and remained absent for nine years, subsequently filing a fresh anticipatory bail application in 2025, which the court rejected. The petitioner offered to withdraw the petition and surrender within four weeks, seeking bail thereafter. The court held that the anticipatory bail could not be entertained given the petitioner’s prolonged abscondence and non‑compliance, and ordered the application dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted after the petitioner has absconded for nine years and failed to comply with the conditions of a prior bail order
- Whether the petitioner may withdraw the anticipatory bail petition and surrender for regular bail
Legislation cited
- D.P. Act — s. 75
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 498A IPC
- domestic violence
- mariage harmony
- absconding
- bail rejection
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47434 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2016 Thana- TELHARA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Devendra Kumar Son of Late Rajdeo Yadav Village- Narayanpur, P.S.-
Hulasganj, District- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Soni Kumari Daughter of Ramdeo Prasad village- Badalpur, Ps- Telhara,
Dist- Nalanda
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sucheta Yadav, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Sucheta Yadav, learned APP.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Telhara P.S. Case No. 31 of 2016 for the offence registered under
sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the D.P. Act
lodged on 01.05.2016 by the informant, Soni Kumari.
3. The Telhara P.S. Case No. 31 of 2016 was lodged
against the petitioner under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and ¾ of the D.P. Act. The anticipatory bail application traveled
to this Court and a Bench of this Court (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh
Kumar Singh as his Lordship then was) in Cr. Misc. No. 26850 of
2016 disposed it of on 21.07.2016 directing the Court concerned to
grant relief on the following terms:
(i) on substantial restoration of the
matrimonial harmony;
(ii) or if the informant gets reluctant
to reconcile the issue; and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47434 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
2/2
(iii) or if the informant fails to
appear before the learned Court.
4. It seems the petitioner failed to abide by the same and
after nine years, preferred anticipatory bail application no. 311 of
2025 before the Court concerned. It was taken up on 16.06.2025 and
recording the facts of the case as also the conduct of the petitioner,
the same was rejected.
5. Aggrieved, the second anticipatory bail application of
the petitioner.
6. After this Court took note of the fact that the petitioner
chose to abscond for nine years without availing legal remedy,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to
withdraw the petition and surrender before the concerned Court in
next four weeks.
7. If the petitioner surrenders in next four weeks and prays
for bail, the Court concerned shall take the same into account and
dispose it of preferably on the same day.
8. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected with
the aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…