Patna High Court
Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithelesh Kumar @ Mithlesh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties and specific conditions.
Summary
Mithlesh Kumar, husband of complainant Prabha Kumari, sought anticipatory bail in a complaint alleging dowry demands, cruelty and offences under Sections 85, 115(2) and 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The matter was referred to mediation, which failed to resolve the dispute. The petitioner denied the allegations but offered to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as temporary relief to the complainant. The State and the complainant opposed bail. The High Court, considering the undertaking and the failure of mediation, granted anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding monthly payments and possible cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a dowry‑related criminal complaint.
- Whether the petitioner’s undertaking to pay monthly relief suffices as a ground for bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 303(2), 482(2), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry prohibition
- marital dispute
- mediation
- criminal complaint
- Section 85
- Section 115(2)
- Section 303(2)
- Section 3 Dowry Act
- Section 4 Dowry Act
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72707 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-513 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - BIKRAMGANJ
District- Rohtas
======================================================
Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithelesh Kumar @ Mithlesh Kumar Singh S/O Ram
Bahadur Singh R/O Village- Ramnath Bigaha, P.O- Dhanaw, P.S- Nasariganj,
Distt.- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Prabha Kumari W/O Mithlesh Kumar Singh, D/O Haricharan Singh R/O
Village- Dhanaw English, P.S- Nasariganj, Distt.- Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nagendra Upadhyay, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
For the Complainant : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Kumar Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant
/Opposite Party No. 2.
2. The petitioner, husband of the complainant
/Opposite Party No. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 115(2)
and 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72707 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026
2/4
3. Earlier, vide order dated 27.01.2026, the matter was
referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High
Court. From perusal of mediator’s report dated 10.04.2026 it is
apparent that despite best efforts, the dispute between the parties
could not be resolved through the process of mediation.
4. As per prosecution case, marriage of
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 was solemnized with this
petitioner on 06.03.2024 and thereafter, all the accused persons,
including this petitioner, started demanding dowry and due to
non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the complainant/Opposite
Party No. 2 was subjected to cruelty and harassment.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner denies the allegations made
in the complaint petition. Petitioner never committed torture to
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 or demanded any dowry.
However, the petitioner undertakes to give Rs. 3,000/- (three
thousand rupees) per month by way of temporary relief/solace,
starting from this month, to the complainant/Opposite Party No.
2. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72707 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026
3/4
bail to the petitioner.
7. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for
the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary
relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month
to complainant/Opposite Party No. 2, in the event of
arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let
the petitioner, above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with
Complaint Case No. 513(C) of 2024, subject to condition as laid
down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. with further following
conditions:
“(A.) The Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2
would file an affidavit before the court below and bring
on record her saving bank account number for its
communication to the petitioner.
(B.) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid
amount per month in the saving bank account of the
Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 .
(C.) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the
aforesaid amount for two consecutive months, the court
below would be at liberty to cancel the bail bond.
(D.) The aforementioned payment will be subject
to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or
connected proceedings. The present order, in no way,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72707 of 2025(4) dt.21-04-2026
4/4
will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.”
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…