Allowed¶24

Arjun Sah @ Arjun v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Nov 2025CR. MISC./11957/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.11957 of 2025, decided 24-11-2025 by Prabhat Kumar Singh, J: anticipatory bail allowed to Arjun Sah @ Arjun in Complaint Case No. 1527c of 2023 (Sections 498A, 323, 504, 341 IPC; Sections 3 and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act) after failed mediation; conditional on Rs. 3,000/- per month payment to complainant Krishna Kumari, compliance with Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S., and cancellation of bail bond on default for two consecutive months.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted conditionally: enlargement on bail upon arrest/surrender within eight weeks on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. and conditions (A)-(D), including monthly deposit of Rs. 3,000/- in the savings bank account of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.

Arjun Sah @ Arjun Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, husband of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2, who apprehends arrest in Complaint Case No. 1527c of 2023 (offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 341 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act), should be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶14

Court's answer

In the event of arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks, the petitioner is to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Begusarai in connection with Complaint Case No. 1527c of 2023, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Bail is subject to further conditions: the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 is to file an affidavit disclosing her savings bank account; the petitioner is to deposit Rs. 3,000/- per month therein; on failure to deposit for two consecutive months the court below may cancel the bail bond; and the payments are subject to any order in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings without precluding other resolution of the dispute.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Husband-petitioner apprehending arrest in Begusarai complaint case of 2023 (Sections 498A, 323, 504, 341 IPC; Sections 3 and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act); earlier reference to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High Court failed (mediator's report dated 18.09.2025); on the petitioner's undertaking to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month as temporary relief/solace to the complainant-wife, bail granted on arrest/surrender within eight weeks on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.; conditions: complainant to disclose savings bank account by affidavit, monthly deposits therein, liberty to the court below to cancel the bail bond on default for two consecutive months, and payments subject to any order in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11957 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1527 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Arjun Sah @ Arjun S/o Shambhu Shah R/o vill - Dhumaha Bazar, P.S.- Pipra, Distt.- Supaul Used Reside Presently At A-22, Siraspur, Raja Vihar, Samaipur Badali, Ward no. 49, North Delhi

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Krishna Kumari W/o Arjun Sah Present Address- D/o Rampravesh Sah, R/o Chhoti Ballia, Masurchak, P.s.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP For Opposite Party No. 2: Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 24-11-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant /Opposite Party No. 2.

¶14

The petitioner, husband of the complainant /Opposite Party No. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶15

Earlier, vide order dated 09.07.2025, the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11957 of 2025(4) dt.24-11-2025 2/3

¶17

Court. From perusal of mediator’s report dated 18.09.2025 it is apparent that despite best efforts, the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation.

¶18

As per prosecution case, marriage of complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 was solemnized with this petitioner on 28.04.2016 and thereafter, all the accused persons, including this petitioner, started demanding dowry and due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 was subjected to cruelty and harassment.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner denies the allegations made in the complaint petition. Petitioner never committed torture to complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 or demanded any dowry. However, the petitioner undertakes to give Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month by way of temporary relief/solace, starting from this month, to the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11957 of 2025(4) dt.24-11-2025 3/3

¶23

the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month

¶24

to complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 , in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the petitioner, above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Begusarai in connection with Complaint Case No. 1527c of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. with further following conditions:

¶25

“(A.) The Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 would file an affidavit before the court below and bring on record her saving bank account number for its communication to the petitioner.

¶26

(B.) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid aforesaid amount per month in the saving bank account of the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 .

¶27

(C.) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail bond.

¶28

(D.) The aforementioned payment will be subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.”

¶29

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶30

shashank/- U T

Arjun Sah @ Arjun v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Sah @ Arjun v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Akash Mushar Vs The State of Bihar

Sikandar Mandal @ Sikandar Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Bir Bahadur Yadav @ Bahadur Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Nilophar Khan @ Nilofar Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Vidyanand Mahto @ Vidhanand Mahto @ Bidyanand Mahto @ Vidayanand Mahato Vs The State of Bihar