Madan Ram Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21772 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2016 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhojpur

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

Madan Ram, Son of Late Shiv Shankar Ram, Resident of MohallaGautambudh Nagar, Gorhana Road, P.S. - Ara Nawada, District - Bhojpur

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Sarita Devi, Wife of Madan Ram, Resident of Mohalla - Gautambudh Nagar, Gorhana Road, P.S. - Ara Nawada, District - Bhojpur

¶9

... ... Opposite Parties

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 13-08-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶13

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.241 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 384, 497, 498-A, 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶15

The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and is in custody since 03.01.2025.

¶16

Allegation against the petitioner is to commit

¶17

cruelty upon informant/O.P. No.2. Petitioner is the husband of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21772 of 2025(5) dt.13-08-2025 2/3

¶19

informant.

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that earlier this petitioner has approached this Court through Cr. Misc. No.44086 of 2016, where one of the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court granted him provisional anticipatory bail vide order dated 06.10.2016, whereafter this petitioner went outside the State in connection with his livelihood and thereafter, due to Covid-19 pandemic, he could not join the proceedings during trial and consequently, bail bond was cancelled. It is submitted that still the petitioner is ready to keep his wife with full of her love and dignity and his non-appearance before trial court was neither intentional nor deliberate rather due to compelling circumstances.

¶21

Learned APP opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶22

In view of aforesaid fact and circumstances, as petitioner being husband remains in custody for more than seven months, coupled with fact that he is desirous to keep informant/wife with him with all her love and dignity,

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21772 of 2025(5) dt.13-08-2025 3/3

¶24

accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.241 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘CrPC’)/under Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’).

¶25

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

¶26

Sanjeet/-

¶27

U T

Madan Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Ram 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

Satish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Avinash Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Yadav @ Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Faiyaj Aalam @ Fayaj Aalam Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Giri @ Putul Giri Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar