Patna High Court
Pramod MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail, finding the complaint vague, unsupported by an affidavit, and therefore not sufficient to justify arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Pramod Mahto, was charged under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged mental and physical cruelty and dowry demands. The complaint was filed after eleven years of marriage and was not supported by an affidavit, which the petitioner’s counsel argued made the allegations vague and omnibus. The State opposed the petition for anticipatory bail. Relying on the lack of specific allegations and the absence of an affidavit, the Court held that the complaint did not satisfy the requirements for arrest. Consequently, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. and the BNSS.
- Whether the complaint, lacking an affidavit and containing general allegations, is sufficient to justify arrest under Sections 498A IPC and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 498A
- dowry prohibition
- mental cruelty
- physical cruelty
- affidavit requirement
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60522 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1380 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Samastipur
======================================================
Pramod Mahto Son of Mallu Mahto Resident of Village - Mahipura, Police
Station - Jandaha, District – Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sharmila Devi Wife of Pramod Mahto Resident of Village - Mahipura,
Police Station - Jandaha, District - Vaishali. Presently Daughter of Shankar
Mahto, Resident of Village - Gaddopur, Ward No.12, Police Station - N.H.
Bangra, District – Samastipur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate
Ms. Rani Shashi Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the complaint, is
apprehending his arrest in connection with T.R. No. 2994 of 2022
arising out of C.R. No. 1380 of 2022 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit mental
and physical cruelty upon the complainant alongwith other co-
accused persons/family members due to non-fulfillment of demand
of cash of Rs. 1 lac and one motorcycle as dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60522 of 2024(4) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
submitted that allegation as raised through complaint petition qua
mental and physical cruelty is appearing very much general and
omnibus in nature against the petitioner. It is submitted that the
allegation raised after 11 years of the marriage and alleged to be
continued which started in year 2011, which itself falsified the
allegation and, furthermore, the complaint in issue is not
supported by affidavit, which is contrary to the settled position of
law as available through Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh [2015 (6) SCC 287]. Petitioner claimed clean
antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking
note of the fact as allegation qua committing mental and physical
cruelty appears very much general and omnibus against petitioner,
where complaint also not supported by affidavit accordingly,
above-named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within
a period of four weeks from this order, is directed to be enlarged
on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand
only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Court
(POCSO), Samastipur/concerned court in connection with T.R. No.
2994 of 2022 arising out of C.R. No. 1380 of 2022, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60522 of 2024(4) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
(in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…