Patna High Court
Akash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court ordered conditional pre‑arrest bail and directed mediation, holding that the dispute is a private matrimonial matter and should not proceed as a criminal prosecution without attempt at settlement.
Summary
The petitioner, Akash Kumar, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a criminal case alleging dowry demands, torture, and assault under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 352 and 351(2) of the BNS and Section ¾ of the D.P. Act. The informant alleged that the petitioner and his relatives harassed her and her children after marriage. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false and that the matter was a private matrimonial dispute, not a societal offence. The High Court held that such matrimonial conflicts are private and should be resolved through mediation rather than criminal prosecution, directing the District Court to issue notices and refer the parties to a mediator. The Court granted interim protection in the form of conditional pre‑arrest bail, subject to successful mediation, and disposed of the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the matrimonial dispute alleged to involve dowry harassment and assault constitutes a criminal offence warranting denial of pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether continuation of criminal proceedings in a private matrimonial dispute amounts to abuse of process.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to conditional pre‑arrest bail pending mediation.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- matrimonial dispute
- dowry harassment
- mediation
- abuse of process
- criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87984 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
======================================================
Akash Kumar S/O Chandra Shekhar Ray R/O Village- Budhara, P.S- Athmal
Gola, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priyanka Kumari W/O Akash Kumar, Village Budhara, P.S. Athmal Gola,
District Patna. At present Priyaka Kumari D/O Paras Roy, Vilage Naya Tola
Sabnima, P.S. Athmalgola, District Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhim Sen Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner seeks to implead the informant as
O.P.No.2.
3. Permission accorded.
4. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Athmal Gola P.S.Case No.279 of 2025, registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 352
and 351(2) of BNS and Sections ¾ of D.P. Act.
5. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the marriage
of the informant was solemnized with the petitioner on
18.06.2022 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87984 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/5
thereafter, the co-accused persons including the petitioners
started demanding Rs.5 lac and one motorcycle as dowry and
due to non-fulfilment of the same, they started torturing her
badly. She further alleged that her husband has illicit
relationship with his sister-in-law (Bhabhi). She also alleged
that all the co-accused persons including the petitioner assaulted
her and snatched her all the jewelry and her both children and
ousted her from the house.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further
submitted that the informant has not been assaulted nor she was
ousted from the house rather she has implicated the petitioner
and other family members of her in-laws only with a view to
harass them.
7. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance can be given to the parties for amicable
settlement of the dispute outside the court.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has shown
his desire to appear before the learned District Court on
17.02.2026 at 10.30 A.M. so that the matter can be referred for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87984 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/5
mediation before the learned Mediator of the District Meditation
Centre to resolve the dispute by way of mediation.
9. Heard the parties.
10. The matrimonial dispute is not an offense against
the society rather a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict
between spouses and does not inherently constitute an offence
against society. However, a false case can have a disastrous
consequence in absence of any criminal content. The personal
dispute cannot call for a criminal offence. In such situation,
continuation of the proceeding would amount to abuse of
process of law leading to vexatious proceeding against the
petitioner.
11. In this regard, the Apex Court in the case of B.S.
Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in, (2003) 4 SCC 675, in
paragraph nos. 12 and 13 has held as under:-
“12. The special features in such matrimonial
matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court
to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial
disputes.
13. The observations made by this Court, though in a
slightly different context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V.
Prasad [(2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733]
are very apt for determining the approach required
to be kept in view in a matrimonial dispute by the
courts. It was said that there has been an outburst of
matrimonial disputes in recent times. Marriage is a
sacred ceremony, the main purpose of which is to
enable the young couple to settle down in life and
live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87984 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/5
suddenly erupt which often assume serious
proportions resulting in commission of heinous
crimes in which elders of the family are also
involved with the result that those who could have
counselled and brought about rapprochement are
rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused
in the criminal case. There are many other reasons
which need not be mentioned here for not
encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the
parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate
their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead
of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes
years and years to conclude and in that process the
parties lose their “young” days in chasing their
“cases” in different courts.”
12. The petitioner has willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on 17.02.2026, so that the
matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
13. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to issue notices to the respective parties and
upon their appearance, refer the matter before the learned
Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for
appearance of the parties to give effect to mediation 2.O.
14. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned upon appearance of the parties on the fixed date shall
make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and
thereafter submit his/her report before the concerned learned
District Court, well within a period of four months, till then, no
coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in
connection with the aforesaid case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87984 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
5/5
15. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court, the petitioner is required to be released on pre-
arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District
Court deems it fit and proper.
16. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 17.02.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its force.
17. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
informant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall continue and the trial shall
proceed in accordance with law.
18. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
19. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…