Dinesh Kumar MehtaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56907 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2025 Thana- CHAINPUR District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
                 ======================================================
                 Dinesh Kumar Mehta son of Madan Kumar Mehta @ Madan Singh Resident
                 of Village - Majhui, P.S. - Chainpur, District - Kaimur (Bhabua)

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Niraj Kumari Maurya Daughter of Dinesh Kumar singh Village- Madurna,
                 Ps- Chainpur, Dist- Kaimur (Bhabua)

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Kumar Sunil, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Utkarsh Shandilya, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Saharsh Shubham, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-01-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as

                   also the informant.

                                 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 285 of 2025 for the

                   offence under sections 69 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 4

                   of the Dowry Prohibition Act lodged on 02.06.2025 by the

                   informant, Neeraj Kumari Maurya.

                                 3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that on the pretext of false promise of marriage, the petitioner

                   came to Varanasi, made physical relationship with her and took

                   her to Agra and Mathura for sight seeing but later, on the

                   pressure of the parents, wanted dowry. This led to the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56907 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                            2/4




                       4. Earlier, this Court while granting interim protection

          to the petitioner sent the matter to the mediation center on

          27.08.2025 but as per the Mediator’s report dated 10.10.2025, it

          could not be resolved.

                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both

          are major, the relationship was consented and had nothing to do

          with the marriage. The FIR is there, he shall be facing the trial,

          undertaking has been given that under no circumstance, the

          witnesses will be coerced and/or any threat will be made to

          them failing which the prosecution shall be free to take step for

          cancellation of bail bond, if relief is granted to him.

                       6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          informant, Mr. Pandey, on the other hand, submits that the

          petitioner under false pretext of marriage, took her to different

          places, especially Agra (Taj Mahal) and in between, made

          physical relationship. Later, the parents wanted dowry, they are

          not in a position to make payment which resulted into the

          present case.

                       7. As recorded above, this Court wanted to resolve the

          issue and sent the matter to the Mediation Center. However, the

          report shows that they could not come to a conclusion. Both are

          major, the FIR is there, he will be facing the music and an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56907 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                            3/4




          undertaking has been given that he shall be diligently appearing

          in trial, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him

          the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.

                       8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of

          arrest or surrender 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 like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate – V,

          Kaimur (Bhabua) in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No.

          285 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under

          Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                       (i) one of the bailor should be the family

          member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official

          document (Aadhar Card/Pan Card/Voter I.D. Card/Driving

          License) 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,

          failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56907 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                                      4/4




                    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)
Adnan/-

U     T