Patna High Court
Sanjit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
Both petitioners are to be enlarged on bail subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties each.
Summary
The petitioners, Sanjit Kumar and Kundan Kumar, brothers‑in‑law of the informant, were charged under sections 498A, 323, 341, 504, 506, 380, 34 of the IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for allegedly extorting a dowry of Rs 1 lakh and subjecting the informant to physical and mental torture. They had earlier been granted interim bail in 2022 but were taken into custody on 13 Nov 2025. The petitioners applied for regular bail, contending false implication and lack of criminal antecedent. The State opposed, citing the dowry extortion allegation and the seriousness of the offences. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the relationship, the pending bail of the informant’s husband, and the length of custody, and ordered that both petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties each.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners, accused of dowry extortion and related offences, are entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the charges.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 380, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- dowry prohibition
- IPC 498A
- regular bail
- extortion
- domestic violence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6104 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2019 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Sanjit Kumar S/O Kishori Prasad, Resident of Village Bich Bazar Kurtha,
P.S.- Kurtha, District- Arwal.
2. Kundan Kumar Son of Kishori Prasad, Resident of Village Bich Bazar
Kurtha, P.S.- Kurtha, District- Arwal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kumari Sonam Verma, W/o Dharmendra Verma @ Abhiraj Verma Resident
of Village- Nadraganj River Side Road Gaya, P.S.- Civil Lines, District-
Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
Mr. Ramashish, Advocate
Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case
no.295 of 2019, registered under section 498A, 323, 341, 504,
506, 380 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4
of the D.P. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that she was married to Dharmendra Kumar Verma in the year
2019. The petitioners who are the elder and younger brothers of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6104 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
her husband were involved in the talks at the time of settlement
of marriage. Various articles as mentioned in the F.I.R. as also
Rs.1 lac was transferred in the account of the wife of petitioner
no.1. It is further stated that soon after the occurrence, the
accused persons including the petitioners herein started to
physically and mentally torture the informant leading to the
case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners who happen to be the bhaisur and devar of the
informant have been falsely implicated in the case. They were
granted bail vide order dated 2.2.2022 (Annexure-1) passed in
Cr. Misc. no.2437 of 2021 with the interim protection and the
direction that the bail would continue till the matter is settled
between the informant and her husband. Learned counsel
submits that subsequently the petitioners were taken into
custody. The husband of the informant has been enlarged on bail
vide order dated 1.7.2021 (Annexure-3) passed in Cr. Misc.
no.19222 of 2021. The petitioners are in custody since
13.11.2025 and have no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2 who has appeared suo-motu. It is submitted by learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6104 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 that not only the
petitioners are named in the F.I.R. but there is direct allegation
against them of having demanded and extorted dowry from the
father of the informant with Rs.1 lac in cash having been
transferred in the account of the wife of the petitioner no.1. The
torture by the petitioners continued leading to the case.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R., the
relationship of the petitioners with the informant, the petitioners
being in custody since 13.11.2025 and the husband of the
informant having been enlarged on bail vide order dated
1.7.2021 (Annexure-3), both the petitioners are directed to be
enlarged on bail in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case no.295
of 2019, on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Gaya.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
U T
Checking your session…