Patna High Court
Natraj GuptaversusState Of Bihar and Anr
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
Condition No. 2 imposed in the anticipatory bail order is set aside as harsh and excessive.
Summary
The petitioner, Natraj Gupta, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash an order dated 10 July 2018 in which the Additional District and Sessions Judge had granted him anticipatory bail with several conditions, notably Condition No. 2, which the petitioner claimed was harsh, excessive and prejudicial. The petitioner argued that he had not demanded dowry nor tortured the informant, making the condition unwarranted. The State opposed the quash but conceded that the condition could be struck down. After hearing both sides, the High Court held that Condition No. 2 was indeed excessive and set it aside, thereby allowing the petition to the extent of removing that condition.
Issues considered
- What is the propriety of Condition No. 2 imposed in the anticipatory bail order under Section 482 CrPC?
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash order
- harsh conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74334 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-962 Year-2017 Thana- BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Natraj Gupta Son of Sri Yogesh Chandra jee, Resident of Dhrub Dangal, Near
Railway Crossing Panjabi Para, P.O.-Radhanagar Road P.S.-Heerapur,
District-Burdwan. West Bengal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Nisha Gupta @ Nisha Kumari Daughter of Late Dineshwar Prasad, Resident
of Mohalla-Laluchak, Angari Near Avilasha Bhawan, P.S.-Lodipur, District-
Bhagalpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Diwakar Upadhyaya, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar -2, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The present petition has been filed under Section
482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 10.07.2018 passed by
the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Bhagalpur in A.B.P. No. 759 of 2018, arising out of Complaint
Case No. 962 of 2017 by which the learned 1 st Additional
District and Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail to
the petitioner had imposed harsh, excessive, onerous conditions.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is aggrieved by Condition No. 2 imposed in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74334 of 2018(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/2
impugned order dated 10.07.2018. He further submits that the
petitioner has not demanded any dowry and has not tortured the
informant, hence, the said condition may cause prejudice against
the petitioner. He submits that Condition No. 2 is harsh
excessive, which is liable to be quashed.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that the said
condition shall not prejudice to the petitioner and shall not
prejudice in the trial, however, he fairly submits that Condition
No. 2 imposed in impugned order may be quashed.
5. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and considering the above facts and circumstances,
Condition No. 2 imposed in the impugned order dated
10.07.2018 is set aside. Accordingly, the present petition is
allowed to that extent.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.)
rakhi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.