Patna High Court
Niraj Kumar @ Neeraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to surrender, bail bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Niraj Kumar, was named in a complaint alleging offences under IPC Sections 323 and 498A and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged mental and physical cruelty and dowry demands. The complaint was filed six months after the alleged incident and was not supported by an affidavit, with the complainant failing to appear in court. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the allegations were vague and the delay was unexplained. The State opposed the bail. The court noted the general nature of the cruelty allegations, the unexplained delay, and the lack of an affidavit, and consequently granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within four weeks, a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the delay in filing the complaint and lack of supporting affidavit.
- Whether the allegations of mental and physical cruelty constitute a cognizable offence under Sections 323, 498A and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Applicability of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mental cruelty
- physical cruelty
- dowry harassment
- delay in filing complaint
- Section 498A
- Section 323
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60523 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1374 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Begusarai
======================================================
Niraj Kumar @ Neeraj Kumar S/o Nand Deo Tiwari R/o vill - Kulharia, ward
no. 5, P.s. - Parwatta, Distt. - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Soni Kumari W/o Niraj Kumar, D/o Laxman Chaurasia R/o vill - Kulharia,
ward no. 5, P.S. - Parwatta, Distt. - Khagaria. At Present R/o Barouni Flag,
P.S. - Teghra, Distt. - Begusarai.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ambrish Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 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 Complaint Case No.
1374C/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
323/498A of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ 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. 10 lacs and one Enova Car as dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that allegation as raised through complaint petition qua
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60523 of 2024(5) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
mental and physical cruelty is appearing very much general and
omnibus in nature against the petitioner. It is further submitted
that the last occurrence as per complaint took place on
28.02.2023, the day on which the complainant alleged to be
ousted from her matrimonial home but the complaint in issue was
filed on 01.08.2023 i.e. almost after six months without any
explanation for such inordinate delay 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. On repeated calls, none appeared on behalf of the
complainant to join the present proceeding.
7. 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,, whereas the present complaint appears to be lodged
after a gap of about six months without any explanation,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60523 of 2024(5) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and Sessions
Judge, Begusarai/concerned court in connection with Complaint
Case No. 1374C/2023, subject to the 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…