Patna High Court
Rinku Pandey @ Prashant Kumar PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rinku Pandey, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry harassment case (Complaint No. 713 of 2023) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 324, 341, 498A, 354 and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He claimed innocence, stating he is the husband of the complainant and is willing to maintain his wife. The State opposed the bail, but the court, relying on the Supreme Court's guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC. The bail was conditioned on a Rs 7,000 monthly maintenance payment to the complainant, a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, and compliance with Section 482 of the CrPC. The order also made the maintenance provision subject to any pending family court proceedings and warned that non‑compliance could lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged offences under IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the court may impose a maintenance obligation as a condition of anticipatory bail.
- Application of the Arnesh Kumar guidelines on arrest and bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 324, 341, 354, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC
- maintenance order
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66960 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-713 Year-2023 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District-
Rohtas
======================================================
Rinku Pandey @ Prashant Kumar Pandey Son of Sri Baban Pande Resident of
Village and PO- Dibhiya PS- Kochas Distt -Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kavita Devi wife of Rinku Pandey Resident Of Village - Debariya, Po-
Khaira, Ps- Kochas, Dist- Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Bijay Kumar Dubey
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar
Mr. Raushan Raj
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 26-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned APP for the State, and the learned counsel for the O.P.
No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No. 713 of 2023 registered for the offence
under Sections 324, 341, 498A, 354 of the Indian Penal Code
and Section ¾ of the DP Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
others are accused of assaulting and torturing the victim for
demand of dowry.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66960 of 2025(5) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been
implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is
the husband of the complainant and is ready to keep his wife.
5. Learned APP for the State and the learned counsel
for the O.P. No. 2 have opposed the application of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submission of the parties and in
light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8
SCC 273, this application for grant of anticipatory bail is
allowed.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within four
weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M,
Sasaram/concerned Court below in connection with Complaint
Case No. 713 of 2023 subject to the conditions laid down in
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 /
Section 482 of the BNSS and with further condition that:
(I). The petitioner is directed to pay
a maintenance amount of Rs. 7000/- from the
month of February 2026 to the
complainant/informant. The maintenance for the
month of February 2026 shall be paid to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66960 of 2025(5) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
complainant/informant within ten days from
today, and thereafter, the maintenance amount
shall be paid to the complainant/informant
every month before the 10th day of each month.
8. It is made clear that the order of maintenance
passed by this Court shall be subject to the outcome of the
maintenance case in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court
concerned, if any.
9. Needless to state that, if the petitioner fails to abide
by the terms and conditions, as stated hereinabove, the State
shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application, before the
learned concerned Court below for cancellation of bail granted
to the petitioner.
10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Sasaram through FAX for
its compliance forthwith.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…