Patna High Court
Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The modification petition is dismissed, and the original order directing payment of Rs. 3,000 per month remains in force.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, was granted anticipatory bail on 3 July 2024 with a condition to pay Rs. 3,000 per month as interim maintenance to Opposite Party No.2, Bajaymanti Devi. The petitioner complied with the payment, but the opposite party, having remarried, sought modification of the payment condition, arguing she no longer wishes to cohabit with the petitioner. The petitioner filed a petition for modification of the bail order. The Court observed that the issue of maintenance and the effect of the opposite party’s remarriage cannot be decided in the anticipatory bail proceeding and must await a separate maintenance suit where both parties can be heard. Consequently, the Court held that the modification petition could not be entertained on this ground alone. The petition for modification was therefore dismissed, leaving the original payment condition intact.
Issues considered
- Can the condition of interim maintenance imposed in an anticipatory bail order be modified on the ground that the opposite party has remarried?
- Whether the Court can adjudicate the maintenance claim within the scope of an anticipatory bail order.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- maintenance
- modification of order
- remarriage
- interim relief
- criminal miscellaneous
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82017 of 2024
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77663 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2023 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary @ Rakesh Kumar Son of Late Jawaharlal
Chaudhary @ Late Jawahar Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla- Road No. 1,
New Colony, Chotaki Delha, P.S.- Delha, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bajaymanti Devi D/O- Shivnath Choudhary Resident of Village-
Devmarkandey, P.S.- Karakat, Gorai, Distt.- Rohtas, Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. This petition has been filed for modification of
order dated 03.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 77663 of 2023
whereby the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail with a
condition to pay Rs. 3,000/- (Three thousand) per month, as
interim solace/maintenance, in the bank account of the
informant/Opposite Party No. 2.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
compliance of aforesaid order, petitioner is regularly paying
aforesaid amount in the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2
but the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 does not want to live
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82017 of 2024(6) dt.09-01-2026
2/2
with this petitioner and has already solemnized second marriage
and, therefore, the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 77663 of 2023 requires modification, so far as payment of
Rs. 3,000/-, as maintenance, is concerned.
4. This Court, while allowing pre-arrest bail to the
petitioner vide order dated 03.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
77663 of 2023, on the submission of petitioner himself, had
directed him to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month as interim
relief/solace to Opposite Party No.2 with observation that the
aforesaid payment will be subject to any order passed in the
maintenance case for final settlement. The issue of maintenance
or the fact that the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 has already
solemnized second marriage cannot be decided by this Court at
this stage. It can only be decided by the concerned Court at the
stage of trial after giving full opportunity to both the parties and
as such, the modification petition cannot be allowed on this
ground alone.
5. Accordingly, this modification petition is
dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.