Patna High Court
Uplesh Kumar Rai @ Uplesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to bail‑bond and surety conditions under CrPC section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Uplesh Kumar Rai, applied for anticipatory bail in a criminal complaint originally registered under multiple IPC offences and the Dowry Prohibition Act, though the court had taken cognizance only of IPC section 498A and the two DP Act sections. He claimed the case stemmed from a matrimonial dispute and that he was falsely implicated, noting that the complainant had not appeared in court and had allegedly married another man. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the lack of the complainant’s representation and the supplementary affidavit supporting his claim warranted bail. The State opposed the bail. The court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under CrPC section 482(2). The application was allowed, with a proviso that the complainant could seek cancellation if the bail was obtained on false facts.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged false implication and the absence of the complainant’s representation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 323, 34, 341, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- matrimonial dispute
- false implication
- IPC 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- CrPC 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9256 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria
======================================================
Uplesh Kumar Rai @ Uplesh Rai S/O Shivanand Roy R/O Ward no. - 08,
Lakhna, P.S- Kasba,Dist- Purnia
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar and Anr.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dheeraj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Asha Devi
None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 10-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though complainant is not impleaded as opposite party no.2, but
then, learned Advocate Md. Naushad Uzzoha appeared on her
behalf sue moto.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 147,323,341,498A,34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 3 and 4 of the D. P. Act, but cognizance has been taken
only under Section 498(A) of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of
the D. P. Act.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9256 of 2025(7) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
the dispute is matrimonial and the petitioner being husband has
been falsely implicated in the instant case by the complainant. It
is also submitted that a second supplementary affidavit has been
filed wherein it has been specifically pleaded at Para-2 that
petitioner was ready to keep the complainant as his legally
wedded wife, but then, complainant was not ready and
subsequently, she performed marriage with Pradip Kumar Rai
son of Chamru Lal Rai, resident of village Thubhri, Panchayat
Kesra, Jokihat, District- Araria. It is also pleaded that mother of
Pradeep Kumar is Amlawati Devi and the complainant presently
is working as an Aanganwari Sevika. It is next submitted that
this perhaps explains why no one is appearing on behalf of the
complainant. It is further submitted that the case earlier was
taken up on 06.02.2026, on the said date also, no one had
appeared on behalf of the complainant and today when the case
is taken up, again no one appears on behalf of the complainant.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9256 of 2025(7) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case
No.52(C) of 2022, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, the complainant would be at liberty to
file an application seeking cancellation of bail granted to the
petitioner, in the event, if anticipatory bail has been obtained
based on a false fact that complainant has married Pradip Kumar
Rai.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…