Patna High Court
Ashique Alam @ Ashique Alam Dokhtar Saffi AhmadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and surrender within four weeks.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashique Alam, was named in a 2019 complaint alleging offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 498A and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, including mental and physical cruelty and a threat of a second marriage over dowry. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the complaint was filed on mere suspicion, lacked an supporting affidavit, and contained vague, omnibus allegations. The State opposed the bail. The court observed that the complainant had not appeared, the complaint was not backed by an affidavit, and the allegations were general, and therefore ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon surrendering within four weeks, furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the allegations of mental and physical cruelty and other offences.
- Whether the complaint, lacking an affidavit and specific particulars, is sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. ¾
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 341, 379, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- mental cruelty
- physical cruelty
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- BNSS
- Section 438
- Section 482
- complaint affidavit
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61779 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2019 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE
District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Ashique Alam Dokhtar Saffi Ahmad @ Ashique Alam, Son of Late Asgar Ali
@ Asgar Alam, R/o Islampur Budhnagar Garh Mohalla, Ps- Islampur, Dist-
Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Roushan Aara Wife of Ashique Alam Dokhtar Saffi Ahmad @ Ashique
Alam, R/o- Bhikhanpur Dhebai, Po- Injor, Ps- Mehandiya, Dist- Arwal.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
7 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.
197 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
341, 323, 307, 379, 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 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
adequate dowry and also threatened to commit second marriage.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that merely on the basis of suspicion, as petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61779 of 2024(7) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
would solemnize his second marriage, the present false case was
lodged. It is submitted that the complaint was not even supported
by affidavit and, therefore, allegation should not be accepted as
correct view of legal report as available through Priyanka
Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [2015 (6) SCC 287].
It is submitted that the last occurrence as alleged through present
complaint is of 14.06.2019, whereas the present complaint was
filed on 09.07.2019 without any cogent explanation. It is
submitted that allegation as raised through complaint petition qua
mental and physical cruelty is also appearing very much general
and omnibus in nature against the petitioner. 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 complaint not appears supported through
affidavit coupled with the fact that petitioner facing general and
omnibus allegation qua alleged mental and physical cruelty
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.61779 of 2024(7) 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, Jehanabad/concerned court in connection with Complaint
Case No. 197 of 2019, 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…