Patna High Court
Shiv Narayan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
Shiv Narayan Singh was charged in a criminal complaint alleging cruelty, dowry harassment, and several offences under the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner argued that the dowry demand allegation was unsubstantiated and that the cruelty claim was vague, noting that he was already paying interim maintenance as ordered by the Family Court. The complainant contended that the petitioner had defaulted on maintenance payments and continued to torture her, though no FIR was lodged for alleged incidents in Delhi. The court observed that the cruelty allegations were general and that the parties were cohabiting in Delhi, and therefore found no justification to deny bail. Consequently, the court directed that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in view of the allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment
- Whether the allegations of dowry demand and cruelty are sufficient to deny bail
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 342, 379, 498-A, 504
Subjects
- dowry harassment
- cruelty
- bail
- criminal procedure
- maintenance
- Indian Penal Code
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- family law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71943 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2023 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Madhubani
======================================================
Shiv Narayan Singh, S/o Laxmi Singh, Resident of Village-Karharba, P.S-
Ladaniya, District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rinki Kumari, W/o Shiv Narayan Singh, R/o Village- Karharba, P.S.-
Ladaniya, Distt.- Madhubani. Present Address D/o Rajendra Prasad Singh,
R/o Village- Patharahi, P.S.- Ladaniya, Distt.- Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
10 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly assisted by
learned counsel appearing for complainant.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the complaint
and apprehending his arrest in connection with C.R. No.228
of 2023 filed under Sections 342, 498-A, 307, 379, 504 read
with 34 of the Indian Penal code but, cognizance has been
taken for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341,
498-A and 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint, petitioner committed cruelty
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71943 of 2024(10) dt.12-01-2026
2/4
upon complainant along with other family members/co-
accused due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry as raised
for cash of Rs.3 lakhs.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioner that the allegation of dowry demand appears found
not convincing during inquiry and, therefore, the learned
Jurisdictional Magistrate declined to take cognizance for the
offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act. It is submitted that even the allegation of
cruelty is appearing very general and omnibus in nature and
moreover under the order of Family Court, the petitioner is
paying Rs.15,000/- per month as ad interim maintenance. It
is submitted that the mediation between the parties has failed
and, thereafter, upon intervention of the Court, the parties
are living together of and on in Delhi.
5. Learned counsel appearing for complainant
pointed out that the petitioner is not paying the maintenance
amount regularly. It is submitted that while O.P. No.2 started
to live with petitioner in Delhi, she was also tortured but, he
fairly conceded that for any torture as alleged to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71943 of 2024(10) dt.12-01-2026
3/4
committed at Delhi, no complaint/F.I.R. was lodged over
there.
6. Taking a contrary submission, it is submitted
that eight month’s arrears at rate of Rs.15,000/- in terms of
Family Court’s order is pending with petitioner. It is submitted
that within four weeks i.e. on 12 th February, 2026, the
aforesaid arrears payment shall be transferred to the account
of complainant/O.P. No.2, the details of which, is already
available with petitioner, in case O.P. No.2 lives separately.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as the allegation of cruelty is appearing
very much general and omnibus against petitioner, coupled
with the fact that O.P. No.2 is living with petitioner of and on
in Delhi, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a
period of four weeks from today, is directed to be released on
bail 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 Judicial Magistrate-1st Class,
Madhubani in connection with C.R. No.228 of 2023, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71943 of 2024(10) dt.12-01-2026
4/4
to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘CrPC’)/under Section
482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in
short ‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…