Patna High Court
Shushil Thakur @ Shushil Kumar @ Sushil Kumar @ Sushil ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond and conditions including periodic financial support to the complainant.
Summary
Shushil Thakur was charged under Sections 498A, 406, 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in a complaint filed by his wife, Sweety Kumari, alleging dowry‑related torture and physical assault after the birth of their second daughter. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, offering to pay Rs.4,000 to his wife and Rs.1,000 each to their two children, and requested that failure to make these payments would allow the wife to seek cancellation of the bail bond. The State opposed the relief, contending that the allegations of dowry harassment warranted denial of bail. The Court, noting the petitioner’s willingness to provide financial support and to unite the family, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions, including the payment schedule and compliance with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The order also stipulated that non‑payment by the 10th of any month would permit the complainant to move for cancellation of the bail, and that any tampering with witnesses or further offences would lead to revocation of the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 498A, 406, 354 IPC and Section 4 DP Act.
- Whether the Court can impose a condition of periodic financial support to the complainant and her children as a term of anticipatory bail.
- What consequences should follow if the petitioner fails to comply with the payment condition.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 354, 406, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
- family violence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47527 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2022 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District-
Vaishali
======================================================
Shushil Thakur @ Shushil Kumar @ Sushil Kumar @ Sushil Thakur S/o
Vinod Thakur @ Vinod Kumar Thakur R/o vill - Majhauli Pachdahi, P.S. -
Sakra, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sweety Kumari W/o Shushil Thakur R/o vill - Majhauli Pachdahi, P.S. -
Sakra, Distt.- Muzaffarpur, Temporarily residing in rented house, Mosadpur,
P.S. - Barauni, Distt.- Begusarai and at present residing D/o Jagnarayan
Singh, vill- Ghoswar, P.S.- Sadar Hajipur, Distt.- vaishali
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Niraj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Niraj Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State.
2. Though, notices were validly served upon opposite
party no.2, on call, there is no appearance.
3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No. 57 of 2022 instituted under Sections
498(A), 406, 354 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the
D.P. Act filed by the complainant, Sweety Kumari.
4. As per the complaint, the lady alleged that she got
married to the petitioner in the year 2008 but was always
subjected to torture for dowry and lastly after the birth of second
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47527 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
daughter, the torture intensified. A Panchayati took place in the
year 2019, the family executed a bond to keep the lady properly
but on 25.12.2021, she was thrashed and thrown out. This led to
the Complaint.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
wanted to keep the family but failed and since they are residing
separately, wants to economically support them by paying
Rs.4000/- to the lady and Rs.1000/- each to the two children
(Rs.6000/-), if relief is granted. Further, if he fails to pay by 10 th
of any month, the lady shall be free to take steps for cancellation
of bail bond.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the
allegation that has come against the petitioner including the fact
that after the birth of second female child, they resorted to
victim, no relief can be granted.
7. The allegation is there, it is unfortunate that even in
the 21st century, the ladies are being thrown out/beaten after
being blessed with female child. However, considering the fact
that the petitioner wants to economically support the
lady/children and as undertaken to take steps for uniting the
family, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him
the privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47527 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
Rs.Rs.4000/- to the lady and Rs.1000/- each to the two children
(Rs.6000/-).
8. It is made clear that if the payment is not made to
the lady by 10th of any month, the lady shall be free to take steps
for cancellation of bail bond.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the concerned court within a
period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each in connection with Complaint Case No. 57
of 2022 to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st
Class, Vaishali at Hajipur subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47527 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…