Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions of a bail bond, sureties, and a monthly payment of Rs. 4,000 to the complainant.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar Sharma, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a complaint (No. 3160 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 323, 379, 307, 498(A), 504, 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complainant, his wife Priti Kumari, alleged dowry harassment, physical cruelty, and assault after demanding an additional Rs. 5 lakh. The petitioner denied any wrongdoing and offered to pay Rs. 4,000 per month as maintenance, which the complainant accepted. The court, after hearing both sides, considered whether the petitioner’s offer and the nature of the allegations warranted anticipatory bail. It granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 10,000 bail bond, two sureties, and the condition that the petitioner deposit Rs. 4,000 monthly in the complainant’s bank account. The order was made to ensure the petitioner’s liberty while safeguarding the complainant’s financial needs.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the pending criminal complaint.
- Whether the petitioner’s offer of monthly maintenance can be imposed as a condition of bail.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 379, 498A, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- maintenance
- Indian Penal Code
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76104 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3160 Year-2024 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Vaishali
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Sharma S/O Jagdish Sharma R/O Village- Kertpur Rajaram,
P.S. - Bhagwanpur, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priti Kumari W/O Deepak Kumar Sharma R/O Village- Kertpur Rajaram,
P.S. - Bhagwanpur, District - Vaishali. At Present D/O Mahashankar Thakur
R/O Vill.- Etawarpur, P.S.- Lalganj, Dist.- Vaishali
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, App.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned
Counsel for the informant-Opposite Party No. 2 and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 3160 of 2024, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379, 307,
498(A), 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The complainant was married to the accused on
12.05.2022, and sufficient gifts and cash were given at the time
of marriage. After a brief period of cordial relations, the accused
and his family allegedly expressed dissatisfaction with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76104 of 2025(4) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
dowry and demanded an additional Rs. 5 lakhs for business
purposes. Upon refusal, the complainant was subjected to
cruelty, including verbal abuse, deprivation of basic necessities,
and ill-treatment. It is further alleged that she was forcibly
administered an injection causing physical harm and was
threatened with death and replacement by another marriage. On
15.06.2024, the complainant was allegedly assaulted,
dispossessed of her belongings, and driven out of the
matrimonial home. Despite efforts at reconciliation, the accused
continued to insist on the demand of Rs. 5 lakhs and refused to
keep her, leading to the filing of the present complaint.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner
alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case.
However, without prejudice to the right and contention of the
petitioner, and in order to maintain harmony in the family, the
petitioner is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per
month to the Opposite Party No. 2 as living cost, subject to the
final outcome of the present case as well as the matrimonial
case, if any, pending between the parties.
5. Learned Counsel for the complainant-Opposite
Party No. 2 submits that the O.P. No. 2 is at the verge of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76104 of 2025(4) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
starvation and accepts the offer so made by learned Counsel for
the petitioner and submits that the petitioner may be directed to
deposit the said amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month in the bank
account of the complainant-Opposite Party No. 2, details of
which shall be furnished by learned Counsel for the Opposite
Party No. 2 to learned Counsel for the petitioner within ten days
from today.
6. After having heard learned Counsel for the
parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and
the fact that the offer made by learned Counsel for the petitioner
has been accepted by learned Counsel for the Opposite Party
No. 2, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of
anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his arrest/surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on bail, upon
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, Vaishali at Hajipur, in
connection with Complaint Case No. 3160 of 2024.
9. This is subject to the condition that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76104 of 2025(4) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
shall deposit a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month in the bank account
of Opposite Party No. 2 positively, starting from 11th April,
2026.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
HarshPandey/-
U T
Checking your session…