Patna High Court
Rampravesh Chaudhary @ Chuti SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court disposed of the bail application, directing the parties to pursue mediation and staying any coercive action pending the mediation outcome.
Summary
The petitioners, Rampravesh Chaudhary and Mamta Devi, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case alleging they tortured their daughter‑in‑law, Anshu Kumari, for dowry demands, invoking sections 85, 82, 352 and 3(5) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court noted that the petitioners, as the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law, were not residing with the couple and claimed no interference in the marital relationship. It observed that a mediation proceeding was already underway in the district court between the petitioners' son and the opposite party. Accordingly, the court directed the parties to continue mediation and stayed any coercive action against the petitioners pending the outcome. Citing the Supreme Court decisions in Rajendra Bhagat v. State of Jharkhand and Mange Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the bail application was disposed without granting bail.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to the petitioners accused under the specified sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the existence of a mediation process warrants staying coercive action and disposing of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 3(5), 352, 82, 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- dowry harassment
- mediation
- criminal procedure
- family dispute
- coercive action
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act
- Dowry Prohibition Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89240 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Rampravesh Chaudhary @ Chuti Singh S/O Krishanandan Chaudhary R/O
Village - Hemarpur, P.S- Samho, Distt.- Begusarai
2. Mamta Devi W/o Rampravesh Chaudhary @ Chuti Singh R/O Village -
Hemarpur, P.S- Samho, Distt.- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anshu Kumari W/O Kanhaiya Kumar,D/O Satish Singh R/O Village -
Hemarpur, P.S- Samho, Distt.- Begusarai. Resident of Vill.- Parsawa, P.S-
Ramgarh Chowk, Dist- Lakhisarai
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Khushi Awadh, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s: Mr.Bharat Bhushan, APP.
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate.
Mr. Manaur Alam, Advocate.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the
O.P No.2.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Mahila P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 85, 82, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS and
Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Allegation is of subjecting the opposite party no.2
to various sorts of torture due to non-fulfillment of demand of
dowry.
4. Mr. Manaur Alam, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Opposite Party No. 2, submits that the petitioners,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89240 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
being the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Opposite Party No.
2, have restrained their son, who is the husband of Opposite
Party No. 2, from entering into any compromise. It is further
submitted that if the petitioners are restrained from interfering in
the matrimonial relationship between their son and Opposite
Party No. 2, there is possibility of amicable settlement being
arrived at between the husband and the wife.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made on
behalf of the informant, and the contentions advanced on behalf
of the petitioners that they are residing separately from their son
and Opposite Party No. 2, the legally wedded wife of their son,
and are not interfering in their marital life in any manner, this
Court is of the considered opinion that an opportunity be
afforded to the petitioners to negotiate with the O.P. No.2 and
their son so that for all the time, the strained matrimonial
relationship between the husband and the wife may be
reconciled.
6. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the parties jointly informs that already a mediation
proceeding is going on between the son of the petitioners and
the O.P. No.2 before the learned District Court.
7. Considering the fact that mediation proceeding is
going on between the husband (son of petitioners) and the wife
(O.P. No.2) before the learned District Court, I direct the peti-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89240 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
tioners along with their son and O.P. No.2 to appear before the
learned District Court on the next date in the mediation proceed-
ing to settle their dispute outside the Court instead of fighting it
out. Till conclusion of the mediation proceeding before the
learned District Court, no coercive action shall be taken against
the petitioners.
8. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably,
then the proceeding is required to be dropped in light of the law
laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rajendra Bhagat
v. State of Jharkhand, reported in, (2022) 18 SCC 465 and
Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another (Special
Leave Petition (Criminal) No.10817 of 2024).
9. The bail application, accordingly, stands disposed
of.
10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Member Secretary, Bihar State Legal Services Authority and the
Patna High Court Mediation Centre for the purpose of record.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…