Patna High Court
Ziyarul HaqueversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court ordered interim protection and directed that the petitioner be released on pre‑arrest bail subject to mediation and conditions, thereby disposing of the application.
Summary
The petitioner, Ziyarul Haque, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the FIR was based on a matrimonial dispute involving alleged dowry harassment. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he was innocent, that the matter was a private family conflict, and that the parties were willing to seek an amicable settlement through mediation. The State opposed the bail but suggested a chance for settlement. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing the need to encourage genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes, directed that the parties appear before the District Court for mediation and granted interim protection to the petitioner, ordering that bail be released subject to conditions set by the District Court. The Court stipulated that the interim protection would lapse if the petitioner failed to appear for mediation, and disposed of the bail application with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail in a case under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 DP Act pending mediation of a matrimonial dispute.
- Whether a matrimonial dispute, absent clear criminal intent, warrants continuation of criminal proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- matrimonial dispute
- dowry harassment
- Section 498A
- mediation
- criminal law
- family law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90640 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2077 Year-2022 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Katihar
======================================================
Ziyarul Haque S/o Late Tejibur Rahman R/o- Ramchandrapur, P.S.- Pranpur,
Distt.- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sakina Khatoon D/o Isrile, W/o- Ziyarul Haque R/o Jhola, P.S.- Amdabad,
Distt.- Katihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with C.A. P.S. Case No. 2077 of 2022 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 4 of D.P. Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant, soon after her marriage, was subjected to physical
and mental torture by her husband and her in-laws due to non-
fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90640 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/5
been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that
petitioner always tries to lead 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. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the
respective parties, on instruction, submitted that the parties have
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on 12.02.2026 for resolving 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90640 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/5
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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90640 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
4/5
appearance of the parties to give effect to Mediation 2.0.
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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90640 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
5/5
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)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.