Patna High Court
Udgar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail may be granted to the petitioner subject to a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
Udgar Yadav sought relief from arrest in a case filed under IPC sections 341, 323, 498A, 504 and the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the charges of dowry‑related torture were false and stemmed from a love marriage. He contended that he was willing to provide a monthly allowance of Rs.6,500 to his wife, Pinki Devi, and her child, subject to any maintenance order. The court considered the bail application and, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, conditioned on the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation and compliance with the payment arrangement. The wife was directed to furnish her bank details, and failure to make the stipulated payments on two consecutive dates would permit cancellation of bail. The application was consequently disposed, with bail granted subject to the stated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner pending trial for offences under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the conditions imposed – monthly payment, provision of bank details, and possible cancellation on non‑payment – are permissible under law.
- Whether Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. provide a proper basis for granting bail in this matrimonial‑dowry dispute.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 498A, 504
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- Section 498A
- Criminal Procedure Code
- maintenance
- love marriage
- matrimonial dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69083 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2024 Thana- DARBHANGA COMPLAINT CASE
District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Udgar Yadav S/o- Hare Ram Yadav R/O Village - Nehra Yadav Tola,P.S -
Nehra, District - Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pinki Devi D/o- Jaldhari Yadav, W/o- Udgar Yadav R/v- Nehra Yadav Tola
Ps- Nehra Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nawal Kishor Prasad, Advocate
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
498(A) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the
Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The case is under Section 498(A) of the I.P.C.
with allegations of subjecting opposite party no.2 to torture on
account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the allegations levelled in the complaint are not correct and as a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69083 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
matter of fact, the petitioner has always been ready to keep the
opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour while the
opposite party no. 2 herself is not ready to reside in the
matrimonial house. It has also been submitted that the parties
had contracted a love marriage and hence the allegations of
torturing with her cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of
dowry demand is false and the case arises out of a complaint
case.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2,
however, controverts the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner and rather supports the allegations
made in the complaint.
6. At this stage, the petitioner offers to give
Rs.6,500/- (Rupees Six thousand Five hundred) per month to
opposite party no.2 in the first week of every month since the
opposite party no.2 is also along with her child. It goes without
saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order
passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral
proceeding.
7. In such view of the matter, let the above named
petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned Court below within a period of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69083 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with C.R. Case
No. 399 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and
subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall
cooperate in the investigation/trial.
8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2,
under instruction, submits that the opposite party no.2
undertakes to provide her bank account details to the petitioner
within a period of two weeks from today. If the opposite party
no.2 furnishes the bank account in which the amount can be
transferred, and yet the petitioner fails to give the aforesaid
amount on two consecutive dates to opposite party no.2, the
opposite party no.2 would be at liberty to file cancellation of
bail.
9. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
anand/-
U T
Checking your session…