Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar RautversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that matrimonial disputes are private matters not constituting a criminal offence and ordered interim protection and referral to mediation, with bail to be granted conditionally.
Summary
Deepak Kumar Raut applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case arising from a matrimonial dispute in which he and others were alleged to have demanded Rs 4 lakh and a motorcycle for their daughter's marriage, leading to the wife being ousted from the matrimonial home. The petitioner claimed innocence and expressed willingness to resolve the matter amicably, while the State suggested an out‑of‑court settlement. The Court observed that a matrimonial dispute is a private conflict and does not, by itself, constitute a criminal offence, warning that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court directed that the matter be referred to the District Mediation Centre and that the petitioner be given interim protection pending mediation. The application was disposed, with the petitioner to be released on pre‑arrest bail subject to conditions imposed by the District Court and the mediator’s report.
Issues considered
- Whether a matrimonial dispute can be treated as a criminal offence under the cited sections of the BNS Act, 2023.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail in the circumstances.
- Whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of process and should be referred to mediation.
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- matrimonial dispute
- mediation
- abuse of process
- criminal law
- family law
- bail conditions
- private dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 87985 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Raut Son of Lalji Raut R/O Vill.- Rampurwa, Madhopur
Chowk, Ward No.- 01, Majhaulia, P.S.- Majhaulia, Dist.- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sarli Devi Wife of Deepak Kumar Raut D/O Hira Lal Basfor (Dom), at
present R/O vill.- Pakhnaha Malahi Tola, P.O.- Balua Rampurwa, P.S.-
Bairiya, Dist.- West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, 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. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Mahila P.S.Case No.32 of 2025, GR No.2836/2025,
registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 85,
115(2), 127(2), 82, 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, after ten
years of marriage, informant was blessed with a female child,
then all the accused persons including the petitioner demanded
to bring Rs.4 lac from her parents to deposit the same in the
Bank Account for the purpose of marriage of female child. They
also demanded a Motorcycle and due to non-fulfilment of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87985 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/5
same, she was ousted from the matrimonial home by her in-
laws.
4. 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 is not ready to live with the
petitioner whereas the petitioner is ready to keep her with full
dignity and honour.
5. 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.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner upon instruction submits 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 mediation before the learned Mediator of the
District Meditation Centre to resolve the dispute by way of
mediation.
7. Heard the parties.
8. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87985 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/5
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.
9. 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87985 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/5
years and years to conclude and in that process the
parties lose their “young” days in chasing their
“cases” in different courts.”
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87985 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
5/5
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.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.