Patna High Court
Shakil AkhtarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Shakil Akhtar petitioned for pre‑arrest bail in a complaint (No. 2114/2024) alleging offences under IPC sections 498A, 406, 420, 120B and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4, claiming he was falsely implicated. The complainant, his wife, alleged mental and physical cruelty and dowry demands, while the petitioner asserted innocence and clean antecedents. The informant’s counsel and the State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations. The court observed that the parties have a remedy before the family court and have agreed not to cohabit, finding no justification to deny bail. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482 of the CrPC and Section 438(2). The application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in a case involving alleged dowry harassment and related offences under IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the existence of a family‑court remedy and the parties' agreement to live apart preclude denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 406, 420, 498A
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- dowry harassment
- IPC 498A
- criminal breach of trust
- cheating
- criminal conspiracy
- family court remedy
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82879 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2114 Year-2024 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Purnia
======================================================
Shakil Akhtar Son of Ajejul @ Ajejul Rahaman Resident of village - Hasan
Dumaria, P.S.- Kochadhaman, District- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ansari Begum Wife of Sakil Akhtar Resident of village - Hasan Dumaria,
P.S.- Kochadhaman, District- Kishanganj At Present Resident of village-
Fulwari, Ps- Routa, Dist- Purnea
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Lal, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Mohammad Tahmeed Helal, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 07-04-2026 Heard Mr. Amal Kumar Sinha, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Bharat Lal, learned
APP for the State and Mr. Mohammad Tahmeed Helal, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the Informant.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Complaint Case No. 2114/2024 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 498A,406,420,120B of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3,4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
complainant, after her marriage with the petitioner, was
allegedly subjected to mental and physical cruelty on account of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82879 of 2025(4) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
dowry demands, and despite partial fulfillment of such demands
by her family, she was ultimately ousted from her matrimonial
home.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has
been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner, being
the legally wedded husband of the complainant, has been falsely
implicated in the present case and no specific allegation of
cruelty or demand of dowry has been made and only general
and omnibus allegations have been levelled against him. The
mediation between the parties has failed. The petitioner has
clean antecedent. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest
bail and submitted that the petitioner has subjected her to
physical and mental cruelty due to non-fulfillment of demand of
dowry. He further submitted that even under Muslim law,
though the husband may have the right to divorce, he cannot
subject his wife to cruelty or forcibly drive her out of her
matrimonial home.
6. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82879 of 2025(4) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
7. Considering the nature of allegation made in the
complaint and also the fact that the parties have remedy before
the competent family court for redressal of their dispute, as both
have agreed not to live with each other, I don’t find any reason
not to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and, as such, the
petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest
bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned
District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned District Court where the case is pending in connection
with Complaint Case No. 2114/2024, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482 of BNSS/ 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. It is made clear that the petitioner must not refrain
in any manner to settle the dispute before the learned District
Court.
9. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…