Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28070 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2022 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE District- Nawada

¶3

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

¶4

Sonu Kumar S/o Arun Prasad Resident Of Village- Rehua, Ps- Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Chanchla Devi D/o Chhotelal Prasad R/o vill - Goithadih, P.s.- Kadirganj, Distt.- Nawada

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Akbar Ali, APP For the Complainant : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

5 10-12-2025

¶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, 379 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶15

Earlier, vide order dated 14.07.2025, the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Patna High Court. From perusal of mediator’s report dated 30.10.2025 it is

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28070 of 2025(5) dt.10-12-2025 2/3

¶17

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 05.05.2007 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 the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28070 of 2025(5) dt.10-12-2025 3/3

¶23

relief/solace of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand rupees) per month 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 Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Nawada in connection with Complaint Case No. 305 of 2022, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. with further following conditions:

¶24

“(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.

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

(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.”

¶28

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶29

shashank/-

¶30

U T

Sonu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Kumar 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

Mahesh Sahani @ Mahesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rupanti Devi @ Rupam Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Babblu Kumar @ Babblu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Mubarak @ Khadim Vs The State of Bihar

Neeraj Singh Vs The State of Bihar