Patna High Court
Abhay Kumar Ranjan @ Abhay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhay Kumar Ranjan, applied for anticipatory bail in a complaint (C847/2023) alleging offences under several IPC sections and the D.P. Act, filed by his wife Sharda Devi alleging cruelty, demand for a motorcycle and money, and her subsequent ouster from the matrimonial home. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the alleged offences. The petitioner asserted his willingness to live with his wife with dignity and not harass her. The court considered the parties’ readiness to cohabit and the purpose of anticipatory bail to prevent undue hardship. It held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to strict conditions to ensure the petitioner’s compliance and protection of the complainant. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000, two sureties, and multiple undertakings, including not harassing the wife, appearing before the trial court, and not tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC (and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) despite the serious domestic‑violence allegations.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- D.P. Act — s. 3/4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 324, 341, 379, 498A, 504, 506/34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- domestic violence
- miserable matrimonial dispute
- IPC offences
- CrPC
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70003 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-847 Year-2023 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- East Champaran
======================================================
Abhay Kumar Ranjan @ Abhay Kumar S/o- Motilal Ram R/v- Gamahariya
Ps- Lakhaura District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Sharda Devi W/o- Abhay Kumar Ranjan, D/o- Gulal Ram R/v- Kusahar Ps-
Turkauliya Dist- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. C847 of 2023 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 379,
498A, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of D.P.Act.
3. According to prosecution case, a complaint petition
has been filed by Sharda Devi and on 19.04.2019 she was
married with petitioner – Abhay Kumar Ranjan. After marriage
the in-laws of Sharda Devi started demanding of Hero
Motorcycle and Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs) but she
failed to fulfill such demand, then the accused persons were
started committing cruelty and torture with her. Thereafter, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70003 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
parents of Sharda Devi tried to resolve the issues but in vain
lastly they assaulted and ousted her from her matrimonial house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is ready to keep the Opposite Party No. 2 – Sharda
Devi with full fledged and dignity and would not harass the
Opposite Party No. 2. On the other hand, counsel representing
Opposite Party No. 2 submits that appropriate directions may be
issued to this petitioner to maintain Opposite Party No. 2 with
full humility and should not tarnish the dignity of this petitioner
in the manner in which, the petitioner is said to have displayed
his conduct leading to filing of the instant case.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. Be that as it may, considering the submissions of
the parties that they are ready to live together. This Court is of
the opinion that the privilege of anticipatory bail should be
extended to this petitioner to restore the matrimonial house of
these persons, which is said to have been brought into existence
on 19.04.2019. In the view of the allowed prayed, the petitioner
is directed to be released on bail with the condition that
petitioner take the Opposite Party No. 2 to his house with full
grace and dignity and will not harass the Opposite Party No. 2
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70003 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
in any manner and undertaking to that effect shall be given to
the Court concerned and in case of violation of such undertaking
and allegations to that effect is made before the Court, where the
matter is pending, the learned Court concerned would be liberty
to take appropriate measures as provided in the law, which may
even lead to cancellation of bail. With the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Motihari, East Champaran in
connection with Complaint Case No. C847 of 2023, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70003 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
U T
Checking your session…