Allowed¶22

Madhusudhan Pathak v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Oct 2025CR. MISC./42386/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) grants regular bail on 07-10-2025 in Cr. Misc. No.42386/2025 to husband-accused Madhusudhan Pathak in Complaint Case No.72(c)/2022, Buxar (Ss.498A, 323 IPC; Ss.3, 4 Dowry Prohibition Act), citing custody since 22.05.2025; bail bonds Rs.15,000 with two like sureties; earlier anticipatory bail by Sessions Judge carried Rs.9,000 p.m. maintenance condition; petitioner filed MC No.39/2022 for restitution of conjugal rights; omnibus-allegation argument raised; OP No.2 absent though notice served.

What did the court decide?

Release of the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022. ¶22

Madhusudhan Pathak Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who has been in custody since 22.05.2025 in connection with Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022 instituted for offences under Sections 498A, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, should be released on bail.

¶16

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, the Court was inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted. Madhusudhan Pathak (petitioner, husband of complainant Shonal Devi), accused in Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022 (Thana-Buxar, District Buxar) for offences under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, was released on bail by the High Court of Judicature at Patna (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) on 07-10-2025, the Court being inclined to grant bail considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone (custody since 22.05.2025; no criminal antecedent submitted). Bail fixed at Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court. Counsel for the petitioner urged false implication and general/omnibus allegations, and noted the petitioner's readiness to keep the complainant with full honour and dignity, his filing of Matrimonial Case No. 39 of 2022 for restitution of conjugal rights, and earlier anticipatory bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge conditional on payment of Rs. 9,000/- per month as maintenance which the unemployed petitioner could not pay. Learned APP opposed the prayer. Opposite Party No. 2 did not appear despite notice validly served. No precedents were cited in this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42386 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2022 Thana- BUXAR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictBuxar

¶3

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

¶4

Madhusudhan Pathak S/O Nagendra Pathak@ Nagendra Nath Pathak Resident Of- Niyazipur, Brahmchari Ji Ka Dera, Ps-Simri, Distt-Buxar

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Shonal Devi W/O Madhusudan Pathak, D/O Narvadeshwar Choubey R/O Village-Rasen, Ps-Rajpur, Distt-Buxar

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

5 07-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

APP for the State. None appears on behalf of OP No. 2 despite notice being validly served.

¶16

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022 instituted for the offences under Sections 498A, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶17

Prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner and his family members tortured complainant physically and mentally for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42386 of 2025(5) dt.07-10-2025 2/3

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is the husband of the complainant and he is ready to keep the complainant with him with full honour and dignity. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner has also filed Matrimonial Case No. 39 of 2022 for restitution of conjugal rights before the family court. Learned counsel further submitted that earlier, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge with condition to pay Rs. 9,000/- per month to the complainant as maintenance but the petitioner being an unemployed person was not able to pay the said maintenance amount. Learned counsel further submitted that the allegation of demand of dowry and torture is false and baseless. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 22.05.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42386 of 2025(5) dt.07-10-2025 3/3

¶25

bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 72(c) of 2022.

¶26

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶27

Alok Verma/-

¶28

U T

Madhusudhan Pathak v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhusudhan Pathak 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

Ram Sevak Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Deolal Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Arbaz Alam @ Arbaz Ansari Vs The State of Bihar