Patna High Court
Sumit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted in the present 498A/DPA case, subject to a bail bond, sureties and a condition to deposit Rs. 5,000 per month to the complainant.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, was implicated in a complaint under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for allegedly demanding a dowry of Rs. 25 lakh and assaulting his wife, causing a miscarriage. The petitioner denied the allegations and offered to pay Rs. 5,000 per month as living expenses to the complainant to maintain family harmony. The complainant accepted this offer and requested the court to direct the petitioner to make the monthly payments. After hearing both sides, the court exercised its power under Section 482(2) of the CrPC to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000, two sureties, and the condition of depositing Rs. 5,000 monthly in the complainant’s bank account. The order also stipulated that the bail would be effective if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case instituted under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the court may impose a condition of monthly monetary payment to the complainant as part of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the court has jurisdiction under Section 482(2) CrPC to entertain the anticipatory bail application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- dowry harassment
- anticipatory bail
- Section 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62627 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1612 Year-2024 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Begusarai
======================================================
Sumit Kumar S/O Late Shambhu Shambhu Prasad Yadav @ Late Shambhu
Yadav @ Shambhu Prasad R/O Village and Post- Baank, P.S- Muffasil, Distt.-
Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. AShwani Bharti D/o Vyas Yadav, w/o Sumit Kumar R/o Kanchangarh Bank,
P.S.-Muffasil, Distt.- Munger, Present address- R/o Shaligrami, P.S.-
Shebpur Kamal, Dist. Begusarai
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rahul Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary
For the informant : Mr. Vivekanand Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Complaint Case No.1612C / 2024 dated 14.06.2022 in which
cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and
Section 4 of the D.P. Act.
3. The prosecution case in short is that the marriage of the
complainant was solemnized with the petitioner according to
Hindu rites and rituals on 23.06.2021. It is alleged that the
petitioner along with other accused persons demanded dowry of ru-
pees 25 lakhs and due to non fulfillment of the same they brutally
assaulted the complainant leading to miscarriage of her pregnancy.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62627 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
innocent and he has not committed any offence in the manner
alleged and has falsely been implicated in this case. The
petitoner never demanded any dowry either in kind or cash. He fur-
ther submits that the petitioner has filed restitution case no. 95 /
2025 in the court of Principal Family Court, Munger for restitution
of conjugal rights. However, without prejudice to the right and con-
tention of the petitioner and in order to maintain harmony in the
family, the petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per
month to the Opposite Party No. 2 as “living cost” subject to final
outcome of the present case as well as matrimonial case and / or
maintenance case filed and decided between the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant / Opposite Party No. 2
submits that petitioner is reluctant to ‘bidagri’ of the
complainant and the complainant / Opposite Party No. 2 is at the
verge of starvation. However, he accepts the offer so made by
learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner
may be directed to deposit the said amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month
in the bank account of the complainant / Opposite Party No. 2, de-
tails of which shall be furnished by learned counsel for the Opposite
Party No. 2 to learned counsel for the petitioner within ten days
from today.
6. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62627 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
into consideration the materials on record and the fact that offer
made by learned counsel for the petitioner has been accepted by
learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2, as such, I am inclined
to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest /
surrender before the learned court below within a period of six
weeks from today be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Begusarai
in connection with Complainant Case No. 1612C / 2024 subject to
the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as
well as the following condition:-
(i) that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of
Rs. 5,000/- per month in bank account of the Oppo-
site Party No. 2 positively by the 7 th day of every
month starting from the month of March, 2026.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…