Patna High Court
Mojibur Rahman @ Mojibur Rahman @ MojibversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate under Section 438 CrPC, applying the principles laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, and imposed reasonable conditions including a maintenance payment.
Summary
Mojibur Rahman applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a complaint under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for allegedly assaulting his wife to demand dowry. He failed to appear in court, claiming lack of means and fearing arrest. The State opposed the bail, while the petitioner asserted innocence. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and a condition to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000 to the informant. Failure to pay the maintenance would lead to cancellation of the bail. The order is subject to any further maintenance proceedings by the lower court.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC despite serious allegations under Section 498-A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s non‑appearance due to lack of means is a valid ground to deny bail.
- Whether imposing a monthly maintenance payment as a condition of bail is permissible.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2), 482
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498-A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 498-A IPC
- dowry harassment
- maintenance order
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Arnesh Kumar principle
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73108 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria
======================================================
Mojibur Rahman @ Mojibur Rahman @ Mojib S/o- Late Gulam Rasul R/v-
Dumaria W.No-6, Ps- Raniganj Dist- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Samsida Khatoon W/o- Mojibur Rahman @ Mojibur Rahman @ Mojib,
D/o- Md. Alam R/v- Gajbi Shankarpur W.No-8, Ps- Bhargama Dist- Araria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md. Naushad Uzzoha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anant Kumar 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
6 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the Informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner and the opposite party no. 02 were
directed to appear in this Court personally today. Pursuant to the
same, the wife has appeared and the petitioner is defying with
the order of this Court by not appearing personally and the
learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner has no means for travelling to appear in this Court.
3. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 05c of 2024 registered for
the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and
under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73108 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
accused of assaulting and torturing the victim for demand of
dowry.
5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in this case.
6. Learned counsel for the State and learned
counsel for the informant has opposed the application of the
petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts along with the
submission of the parties and in view of the law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs.
State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, this application of
grant of anticipatory bail is allowed.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within
six weeks from today, 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 Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Araria/concerned Court below in
connection with Complaint Case No. 05c of 2024, subject to the
conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73108 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
Procedure, 1973 / Section 482 of the BNSS.
8. As a condition of this order, the petitioner is
directed to pay a maintenance amount of Rs. 10,000/- from the
month of February, 2026 to the informant and the maintenance
for the month of February, 2026 shall be paid to the informant
within ten days of pronouncement of this order and thereafter
the maintenance amount from the month of March, 2026 shall
be paid to the informant every month before the 10 th day of the
month and if the petitioner fails to pay the maintenance amount
to the opposite party no. 02 then his bail bonds shall be
cancelled by the Court below.
9. It is made clear that the aforesaid maintenance
order will be subject to the outcome of any order of concerned
Court below passed in maintenance proceedings, if any.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.