Patna High Court
Kabindra RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court granted interim pre‑arrest bail and ordered the matter to be referred to mediation, disposing the bail application.
Summary
Kabindra Ram applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case arising from a matrimonial dispute where he was alleged to have demanded money and a motorcycle, invoking Sections 85, 3(5) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating the matter was a private family conflict and not a societal offence. The State argued for an opportunity for amicable settlement. The Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents, held that matrimonial disputes are private matters and should be resolved through mediation rather than criminal prosecution. It directed the District Court to issue notices, refer the parties to the District Mediation Centre, and grant the petitioner interim protection in the form of pre‑arrest bail pending mediation. The application for bail was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a matrimonial dispute alleged under Sections 85, 3(5) of the BNS Act and Sections 3, 4 of the D.P. Act warrants pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether such a dispute constitutes a criminal offence against society or a private family matter.
- Whether the Court should direct mediation before proceeding with criminal trial.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- matrimonial dispute
- mediation
- criminal procedure
- false case
- abuse of process of law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89921 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- KOCHAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
Kabindra Ram S/O Nagar Ram Resident of Village- Pakari, P.S- Kochas,
District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Parwati Devi W/O Kabindra Ram R/O Village- Pakari, P.S- Kochas, Distt.-
Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md Fazle Karim, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Md Fazle Karim, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Kochas P.S. Case No. 98 of 2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 85, 3(5) of the BNS and
Sections 3, 4 of D.P. Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant, who is husband of informant/O.P. No.2 alleges that
the petitioner was already married to informant 14 years back
and they are having two children. The informant has further
alleged that her husband and mother-in-law made demand of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89921 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/5
rupees one lac and a motorcycle from her parents house in case
of failure they threatened her to kill and her husband will marry
with another girl.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that
petitioner leading a peaceful married life with the informant but
she never co-operates with him on the instigation of her family
members. Learned counsel further submitted that marriage is a
sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish suddenly erupts
into hatred and the parties ponder to reconcile their dispute
outside the court.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
6. The petitioner’s counsel on instruction submitted
that the petitioner has agreed to appear before the learned
District Court at 10:30 A.M. on 12.02.2026.
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.89921 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89921 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/5
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.
10. The petitioner has willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on 12.02.2026, 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.
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 six 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89921 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
5/5
14. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 12.02.2026 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 opposite
party no.2 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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…