Patna High Court
Sourav KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court allowed the bail petition, granting bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sourav Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 and 498A/34, and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with a dowry‑related dispute. He applied for bail, asserting his innocence, lack of prior criminal record, cooperation with the investigation and that he had already benefited from Section 41A of the CrPC. The State opposed the bail. The court noted that the maximum punishment for the alleged offences is three years, the petitioner had cooperated with the investigation and had no antecedents, and therefore granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023. The bail order also imposed conditions for cancellation if the petitioner concealed any criminal antecedents or misrepresented earlier bail petitions. The petition was allowed and bail was ordered.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite charges under multiple IPC sections and the Dowry Prohibition Act
- Whether the petitioner’s cooperation and benefit under Section 41A CrPC justify bail
- Whether the maximum punishment of three years warrants bail
- Whether bail can be conditioned under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41A, 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. ¾
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 354, 498A/34, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC offences
- Section 41A CrPC
- cooperation with investigation
- maximum punishment
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.633 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2024 Thana- KARJA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Sourav Kumar S/O Ravi Ranjan Singh R/O village-Bhatauna, P.S- Karja,
District - Muzaffarpur and At present Mohalla- I. G.- Colony, Bhagwanpur,
P.S - Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Saumya Salini W/O Sourav Kumar and D/O Vijay Shankar At present
resident of Village - Kamalpura, P.S- Paru, District- Muzaffarpur,Mob-
9430926637
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate
For the State : Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest,
in connection with Karja P.S. Case No. 193 of 2024, dated
16.08.2024, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 and 498A/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section ¾ of D.P. Act.
3. As per allegation, the marriage between the
informant and the petitioner were solemnized in the year, 2022
and subsequent to the marriage, there was demand of additional
dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she has
subjected to cruelty for various ways.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.633 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that during investigation, petitioner has
got benefit of Section 41A Cr.PC and he has cooperated with the
investigation. He further submits that charge-sheet has been
submitted and now cognizance has been taken and summon has
been issued against the petitioner. He further submits that
petitioner is apprehending that he may be taken into custody by
the Court below. He also submits that the maximum punishment
for the alleged offence is three years.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier
either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the
bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail.
8. Considering the fact that maximum punishment for
the alleged offence is three years and petitioner has already get
benefit of Section 41A of Cr.PC and he has cooperated with the
investigation, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioner,
above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.633 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
or surrender before the court below within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this
order, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned concerned Court Below, in connection
with Karja P.S. Case No. 193 of 2024, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and on
the following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned
court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after
hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the
same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,
learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.