Patna High Court

Arbind Singh @ Munna SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 11 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bail bond, sureties and the condition of paying Rs.5,000 per month as interim maintenance.

Summary

Arbind Singh (Petitioner) was implicated in a matrimonial dispute complaint (Case No. 128 of 2022) alleging offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Mediation ordered by the court failed to resolve the dispute. The petitioner claimed innocence and offered to pay an interim maintenance of Rs.5,000 per month to his wife (Opposite Party No.2). The wife opposed the bail application. Considering the petitioner’s willingness to provide maintenance, the court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and the condition of paying the stipulated maintenance.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving multiple serious IPC offences and a matrimonial dispute
Whether the condition of interim maintenance is appropriate for granting bail
Compliance with the requirements of Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

Legislation cited

Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 341, 379, 406, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

anticipatory bail
matrimonial dispute
maintenance
IPC offences
Dowry Prohibition Act
Criminal Procedure Code
mediation

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51183 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2022 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                         Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Arbind Singh @ Munna Singh S/O Late Ramdeo Singh R/O Maharana Pratap
                 Colony, Dighi Kala, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, Distt-Vaishali.

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Chandni Kumari W/O Arbind Singh, D/O Dilip Kumar Presently residing at
                 Village- Baijnathpur, P.O.- Birna Lakhan Sen, P.S- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Jainendra Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Suman Kumari Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
                 PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   11-02-2026                       Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

                   learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for O.P. No. 2.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Complaint Case No. 128 of 2022, registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379,

                   406, 498(A), 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections ¾

                   of the D.P. Act.

                                3. It is a case of matrimonial dispute.

                                4. Vide order dated 12.11.2025, the matter was

                   referred to the Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation

                   Centre. The report of the learned Mediator shows that the matter

                   could not be resolved between the parties and therefore, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51183 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
                                            2/3




          mediation failed.

                       5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

          that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated.

          He has submitted further that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.

          5,000/- per month as interim maintenance to opposite party no.

          2.

                       6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP No. 2

          has opposed the prayer for bail.

                       7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and

          circumstances, especially the fact that the petitioner is ready to

          pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as interim maintenance to opposite

          party no. 2, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or

          surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be

          released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned court of Smt. Ankita Jaiswal

          Judge-VII-cum-A.C.J.M.-V, Vaishali at Hajipur / concerned

          court below in connection with Complaint Case No. 128 of

          2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

          438(2) Cr.P.C.

                       8. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- per

          month as interim maintenance to opposite party no. 2,
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51183 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     failing which his bail bond shall liable to be cancelled. The

                     interim maintenance will be subject to any other order

                     granted by any other Court of competent jurisdiction

                     granting maintenance to Opposite Party No. 2


                                          (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

kundan/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…