Patna High Court
Ajay Das @ Ajay Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the allegations were general and omnibus, and therefore granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Ajay Das was named in a complaint (Case No. 1265C of 2022) alleging offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 498A, 494, 307 and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, including cruelty and physical assault for allegedly demanding Rs 8 lakh and a vehicle as dowry. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the allegations of physical assault and mental cruelty were vague, general and omnibus, and that the claim of a second marriage was based merely on suspicion. The State opposed the bail, contending that the cruelty allegation specifically targeted the petitioner. The court examined the complaint and agreed that the accusations were indeed general and lacked specificity. Consequently, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations in the complaint are sufficiently specific to deny anticipatory bail to the petitioner
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. when the complaint contains general and omnibus allegations
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 341, 494, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- cruelty
- general and omnibus allegations
- IPC
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9529 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1265 Year-2022 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE
District- Saharsa
======================================================
Ajay Das @ Ajay Kumar Das S/O Vika Das R/O Village -Kamalpur, P.S.-
Kunauli Dist.- Supaul
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Laxmi Kumari W/O Ajay Das, D/O Akhilesh Das R/O Vill.- Kamalpur,
Ward no. 12, P.S.- Kunauli, Dist.- Supaul. at Present R/O Gharhara, P.S.-
Navhatta, Dist.- Saharsa.
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ansul, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Pramod Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kuma, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr.Satish Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr.Dinesh Maharaj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
7 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ansul, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State duly assisted by learned
counsel for the complainant/O.P. No.2.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the complaint
petition, is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint
Case No. 1265C of 2022 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 494, 307 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per complaint petition, it is alleged that petitioner
committed cruelty upon the complainant/O.P. No. 2 due to non-
fulfillment of demand of dowry as raised for a cash of Rs. Eight
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9529 of 2025(7) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
Lakhs and also one Four Wheeler vehicle.
4. Mr. Ansul, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner submitted that allegation qua physical assault
and mental cruelty due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry
appears very much general and omnibus against the petitioner.
5. It is also pointed out by Mr. Ansul that the allegation
set out through para 10 of the complaint petition suggests in
itself that with general and omnibus allegation qua all accused
persons including petitioner for the occurrence dated
12.11.2022 was raised. Mr. Ansul, denied the second marriage
of the petitioner and submitted that allegation of second
marriage was raised only on the basis of suspicion as petitioner
was in talking term with one girl namely, Chandani Kumari.
Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State duly assisted by learned
counsel appearing for the informant, while opposing the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submitted that petitioner is
the husband and thrust of allegation qua committing cruelty is
specifically available against him, however, he could not
disputed the general and omnibus nature of allegation as raised
through paragraph 10 of the complaint petition as submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9529 of 2025(7) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
aforesaid by Mr. Ansul, learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as complainant/O.P. No. 2 raised
allegation qua demand of dowry and physical assault is very
much general and omnibus qua petitioner, as discussed above,
accordingly, above-named petitioner, in the event of his
arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this order, is
directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -
1st Class, Saharsa/concerned court in connection with Complaint
Case No. 1265C of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…