Ritesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

Ritesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks: petitioner to be enlarged on bail on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the SDJM, Khagaria, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and special conditions (affidavit disclosing opposite party no. 2's saving bank account; monthly deposit of Rs. 3,000/- maintenance therein; bail-bond cancellable on default of two consecutive months; payments subject to orders in matrimonial/maintenance proceedings).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406 and 313 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, should be enlarged on bail in the event of arrest/surrender, and on what conditions.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest/surrender within six 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 Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Ratio / Principle

As a condition of bail, opposite party no. 2 is to file an affidavit before the court below bringing on record her saving bank account number, for communication to the petitioner.

Key takeaways

As a condition of bail, the petitioner is to deposit the maintenance amount per month in the saving bank account of opposite party no. 2.ratio¶23
If the petitioner fails to deposit the maintenance amount for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.ratio¶24
The maintenance payment directed by this order will be subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.), oral order dated 03-01-2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 20176 of 2024, arising out of PS Case No. 601 of Year 2020, Thana Khagaria (complaint case), District Khagaria. The petitioner, husband of opposite party no. 2, apprehended arrest for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The mediator's report dated 20.11.2024 recorded that the inter-party dispute could not be resolved through mediation. On the petitioner's undertaking to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month maintenance to opposite party no. 2, the Court directed that, in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks, he be enlarged on bail on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in Complaint Case No. 601(C)/2022, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and further conditions: opposite party no. 2 to file an affidavit disclosing her saving bank account number for communication to the petitioner; the petitioner to deposit the monthly maintenance amount in that account; failure to deposit for two consecutive months entitles the court below to cancel the bail-bond; and the payments to remain subject to any order in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings, the order not precluding the parties from resolving the issue otherwise.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20176 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-601 Year-2020 Thana- KHAGARIA COMPALINT CASE District- Khagaria

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

Ritesh Kumar Singh son of Prasad Singh Village- Durgapur Ps- Rajoun DistBanka

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

Preeti Kumari wife of Ritesh Kumar Singh, D/o- Niranjan Singh VillageFulbaria Ps- Gogri Dist- Khagaria

... ... Opposite Parties

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P. Mr. R K Singh, Advocate

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

4 03-01-2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the opposite party no.2.

The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.2, apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 406 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Mediator’s report dated 20.11.2024 reveals that in spite of efforts, dispute between the parties could not be resolved through process of mediation. However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner offers and undertakes that he is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 3000/-per month, starting from this month to the opposite party no.2.

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 3000/- per month, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, above-named petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20176 of 2024(4) dt.03-01-2025 2/2

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 the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in Complaint Case No. 601(C)/2022, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as on the following conditions:-

(i) 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.

(ii) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid maintenance amount per month in the saving bank account of the opposite party no.2.

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

(iv) 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.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

Shashi

U T