Md. Isteyak Ahmad @ Md. Isteyak Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20625 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2348 Year-2023 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur

====================================================== Md. Isteyak Ahmad @ Md. Isteyak Son of Late Md. Asfaque Resident of Village - Mahmudpur Ward No.- 11, Police Station - Halai, District – Samastipur ... ... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar

¶6

Rajiya Sultana Wife of Md. Isteyak @ Md. Isteyak Daughter of Md. Mansur, Resident of Village - Mahmudpur Ward No.- 11, Police Station - Halai, District - Samastipur

¶7

... ... Opposite Party

¶8

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

¶9

Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mrs.Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 01-09-2025

¶14

Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Center of Patna High Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed (Report kept at flag ‘M’).

¶15

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

¶16

The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.2, apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 109, 110, 498A, 120B, 420, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

¶17

Prosecution case in brief is that opposite party no.2 was married with the petitioner in 2023. After marriage, this petitioner along with other accused persons started demanding Rs. 2 lacs and a motorcycle as dowry and on non-fulfillment of the same they used to assault and torture her. Lastly, accused

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20625 of 2025(4) dt.01-09-2025 2/3

¶19

persons ousted opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while denying the allegations, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case because he happens to be husband of opposite party no.2. Petitioner is ready to keep her with honour and safety. Besides this, petitioner is ready to give Rs. 3000/-per month to opposite party no.2 by way of temporary relief/solace, starting from this month, subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner, being husband of opposite party no.2, in connivance with his family members, subjected her to harassment and cruelty for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also ousted her to her parents’ house. It is further submitted that she has no means of livelihood and is on the verge of starvation.

¶22

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as condition of 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 the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in CR No. 2348 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as well as on the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) Opposite party no.2. would file an affidavit before the court below and bring on record her saving bank account

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20625 of 2025(4) dt.01-09-2025 3/3

¶25

number for its communication to the petitioner.

¶26

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

¶27

(iii) In case, petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount of temporary relief/solace for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.

¶28

(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.

¶29

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶30

Shashi

¶31

U T

Md. Isteyak Ahmad @ Md. Isteyak v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Isteyak Ahmad @ Md. Isteyak 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

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ankit Jha @ Ankit Kashyap Vs The State of Bihar

Girja Shanker Dutt Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Issar Vs The State of Bihar

Murari Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Karmullah Anshari @ Hero @ Karmullah Miya Vs The State of Bihar