Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Bhushan RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bail bond, sureties and conditions relating to monthly maintenance payments.

Summary

Bhushan Rai, the petitioner, faced an anticipatory bail application in a dowry harassment case under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The marriage took place in 2015 and the complainant alleged cruelty for non‑payment of dowry. Mediation ordered by the court failed, after which the petitioner offered to pay Rs 5,000 per month as temporary relief. The court, noting this undertaking, allowed the anticipatory bail with a bail bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to specific conditions including monthly deposits into the complainant’s bank account. The order also stipulated that failure to pay for two consecutive months could lead to cancellation of bail.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in a dowry harassment case under Sections 498A/34 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act?
  • Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay a monthly amount can justify the grant of anticipatory bail?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • dowry harassment
  • IPC 498A
  • Dowry Prohibition Act
  • maintenance
  • mediation
  • bail conditions
  • family law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6362 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1766 Year-2023 Thana- BHOJPUR COMPLAINT CASE
                                                     District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Bhushan Rai son of Bharosa Rai Resident of Village- Saran Dhane Chhapra,
                 Police Station- Derani, District- Saran

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Ranju Devi Wife of Bhushan Rai Resident of village- Goraiya toli, Anaith,
                 Ps- Ara Nawada, Dist- Bhojpur

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, A.P.P.
                 For the complainant      :    Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   23-06-2026                     Earlier, vide order dated 19.03.2026, the matter was

                   referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High

                   Court, Patna, but as per the Mediator’s Report (flag ‘M’), the

                   mediation has failed.

                                2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition

                   Act.

                                4. As per prosecution case, marriage of complainant

                   was solemnized with this petitioner in the year 2015. Thereafter,

                   it is alleged that complainant was subjected to torture and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6362 of 2026(4) dt.23-06-2026
                                            2/3




          cruelty due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while denying

          the allegations levelled against him, submits that petitioner, who

          is husband of the complainant, is ready to keep her with honour

          and safety. Besides this, petitioner is ready to give Rs. 5000/-per

          month to the complainant by way of temporary relief/solace,

          starting from this month, subject to any order passed in

          matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

                       6. In view of the aforesaid undertaking of learned

          counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give Rs.

          5000/- per month to the complainant by way of temporary

          relief/solace, starting from this month, this anticipatory bail

          application is allowed.

                       7. Let the above-named petitioner, in the event of

          arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be

          enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten

          thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at

          Ara in connection with Complaint Case No. 1766 (C) of 2023,

          subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the

          Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita as well as on the following

          conditions:-
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6362 of 2026(4) dt.23-06-2026
                                                      3/3




                                 ‘(1) Complainant would file an affidavit before the

                    court below and bring on record her savings bank account

                    number for its communication to the petitioner.

                                 (2)    Petitioner       would          deposit   the   aforesaid

                    maintenance amount per month in the savings bank account of

                    the complainant.

                                 (3) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the

                    maintenance amount for two consecutive months, the court

                    below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.

                                 (4) The aforementioned payment will be subject to

                    any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected

                    proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the

                    parties to resolve the issue otherwise.’




                                          (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/Sanjay

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.