Patna High Court
Shankar Kumar @ Shankar ChaurasiaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond and the condition of regular maintenance payment.
Summary
Shankar Kumar, apprehending arrest in a case under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Domestic Violence Act, applied for anticipatory bail, claiming he was falsely implicated by his wife, who had also received a notice in a restitution of conjugal rights suit filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The State opposed bail, arguing that filing the matrimonial suit does not absolve the petitioner of alleged offences and that he had not provided any maintenance. The petitioner offered to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000 and undertook to credit the amount to his wife’s account, seeking bail on the basis that incarceration would hamper possible reconciliation. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and conditioned the bail on timely payment of maintenance, allowing cancellation if the petitioner defaults for two consecutive months. The order also directed the trial court to inform the wife through her counsel.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged cruelty under Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act.
- Whether the filing of a restitution of conjugal rights petition under the Hindu Marriage Act can be a defence against criminal charges.
- Whether the court can impose a condition of maintenance payment as a term of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Hindu Marriage Act — s. 9
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act — s. 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 498A
- Domestic Violence Act
- maintenance
- restitution of conjugal rights
- Hindu Marriage Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54417 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-616 Year-2023 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE
District- Nawada
======================================================
Shankar Kumar @ Shankar Chaurasia S/o Suresh Chaurasia R/o Village-
Ranibazar, Kawakol, PS- Kawakol, Distt- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Reena Kumari W/o Shankar Kumar @ Shankar Chaurasia, D/o Bacchu
Chaurasia R/o Ranibazar, Kawakol, P.S.- Kawakol, Distt.- Nawada, At
present residing at Benipur, P.S.- Rupo, Distt.- Nawada
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rashid Zafar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
Code as well as Section 4 of the DP Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that from the office notes dated 15.11.2025, it would
manifest that the opposite party no. 2 has personally received the
registered cover notice but she chooses not to appear and contest the
case. It is further submitted that petitioner, being the husband, has
been falsely implicated in the instant case by the opposite party no. 2.
It is next submitted that petitioner is still willing to keep the opposite
party no. 2 and the child with honour and dignity but then the
opposite party no. 2 is not interested in reviving her conjugal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54417 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
relationship. It is also submitted that petitioner has also filed
Matrimonial Case No. 117 of 2023 in the Court of learned Principal
Judge, Family Court, Nawada under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage
Act for restitution of his conjugal rights. It is further submitted that
notice in the said case has been issued.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that merely filing a
petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights is no defence, when the
opposite party no. 2 is staying alone and sustaining the child even in
absence of any financial support. It is further submitted that it is easy
to file an application seeking restitution of conjugal rights because
cases in the District Court take time. It is next submitted that if
petitioner was really interested in reviving his conjugal relationship
in that event the petitioner would have paid some sustenance amount
to the opposite party no. 2 and the child to establish his bonafide, but
then from the submissions and the pleadings made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, it appears that no
maintenance is being given to the opposite party no. 2. It is also
submitted that it might be a possibility that the opposite party no. 2
despite receiving notice has not appeared as she might be having
financial constraint to engage a learned Lawyer.
5. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that he has instruction to make submission that
petitioner, being the husband, is aware of his responsibility towards
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54417 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
the opposite party no. 2 and the child and, thus, is willing to pay a
monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- which shall commence from
01.03.2026. It is further submitted that no useful purpose would be
served by sending the petitioner to jail as chances of future
reconcilation will also get marred on which learned A.P.P. submits
that it might be a ploy of the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail by
making a submission that he is willing to sustain the opposite party
no. 2 and the child on which learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits based on instruction that if the petitioner does
not pay the amount of maintenance as agreed his anticipatory bail
shall be liable to be cancelled. It is next submitted that petitioner will
make endeavour to obtain the bank account number of the opposite
party no. 2 for crediting the amount of maintenance as agreed and if
he is not able to obtain the bank account number of the opposite
party no. 2 in that event the amount will be credited with the learned
District Court.
6. At this stage, learned A.P.P. fairly submits that since
petitioner has given an undertaking, as such, no useful purpose would
be served by sending the petitioner to jail as in future with
intervention of well-wishers the parties may try to reslove the dispute
amicably.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties let the
petitioner above-named in the event of his arrest or surrender within
a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54417 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection
with Complaint Case No. 616 of 2023, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
8. However, it is made clear that opposite party no. 2 shall
be at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of anticipatory
bail granted to the petitioner in the event the petitioner does not
credit the amount of maintenance as agreed for two consecutive
months.
10. The learned trial court is directed to ensure that a copy of
this order be handed over to the opposite party no. 2 through her
learned counsel appearing on her behalf in the trial court for its
onwards communication to the opposite party no. 2.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…