Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar @ Ram Sanjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond, sureties and a condition that the petitioner pay monthly maintenance, with the bail liable to be cancelled on non‑payment.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a criminal case registered under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging false implication by his wife, Switi Kumari. He claimed he was a labourer working in Bengaluru and offered to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 3,500 to his wife from 20‑April‑2026. The wife’s counsel argued that the maintenance undertaking might be a ploy to obtain bail and warned that breach would justify cancellation of bail. The court considered the possibility of reconciliation and the petitioner’s willingness to provide financial support. It granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 5,000, two sureties, and the condition that the bail may be cancelled if the maintenance is not paid for two consecutive months. The order also left open the prospect of a higher court fixing a different maintenance amount.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 498A, 406 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the court can impose a condition of monthly maintenance and cancel anticipatory bail upon its breach.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- maintenance
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- IPC 498A
- IPC 406
- marital dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70628 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1947 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Begusarai
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar @ Ram Sanjay Kumar S/O Narayan Paswan Village- Pir
Nagar, (Pir Nagar, Gamharia), Ward No. 01, P.S.- Naokothi, District-
Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Switi Kumari W/O Sanjay Kumar @ Ram Sanjay Kumar, D/O Hetu Paswan
R/O Vill.- Bari Moraha, Ward no. 1, P.S.- Hasanpur, Dist.- Samastipur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sandip Kumar Gautam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP
Mr. Yogesh Kumar, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State along with learned counsel for OP
No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and
406 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner being husband has been falsely implicated in the
instant case by the OP No. 2. It is next submitted that the
relationship in between the petitioner and the OP No. 2 has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70628 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
soured to an extent where it is not possible to revive the
conjugal relationship, but with passage of time and on
intervention of well-wishers, the parties may resolve their
dispute amicably. It is also submitted that petitioner is a labourer
and works at Bengaluru and being husband is aware of his
responsibility towards his wife, i.e., OP No. 2, as such petitioner
is willing to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 3,500/- to the OP
No. 2, which shall commence from 20-4-2026.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OP No.
2 submits that though petitioner has undertaken before this court
that the monthly maintenance of Rs. 3,500/- shall be paid to the
OP No. 2, but then it might be a ploy of the petitioner to seek
anticipatory bail and after seeking anticipatory bail, the
petitioner will not make the payment as agreed, on which the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits
that petitioner is aware of the consequences which would entail
in the event if the petitioner breaches the undertaking given
before this Court, it is further submitted that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner and subsequently
the petitioner breaches his undertaking, in that event, his
anticipatory bail shall be liable to be cancelled.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OP
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70628 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
No. 2 submits that since petitioner is willing to pay a monthly
maintenance of Rs. 3,500/-, as such no useful purpose would be
served by sending the petitioner to jail as chances of future
reconciliation will also get marred.
6. The learned counsel for the OP No. 2 also submits
that he will WhatsApp the bank account number of the OP No. 2
on the WhatsApp number of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes
to communicate the same to the petitioner so that the monthly
maintenance as agreed commences from 20-4-2026.
7. Considering the submission made by the learned
counsel for the parties, the petitioner above-named, in the event
of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from
today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Complaint Case No. 1947C of 2023, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. However, it is made clear that OP No. 2 shall be at
liberty to file an application before this court seeking
cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70628 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
the event if the petitioner does not deposit the monthly
maintenance as agreed for two consecutive months.
9. It is further made clear that the present
maintenance shall stop, if a court of competent jurisdiction fixes
the maintenance.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…