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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail application neither granted nor refused on merits; disposed of in terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar), with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the concerned Superintendent of Police and Investigating Officer within three weeks along with a web copy of that order, and a direction that the Superintendent of Police ensure strict adherence by the Investigating Officer to the directions in that order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Madhepur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2024 for offences under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506, 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the submission made by the learned APP, the Court disposed of the anticipatory bail application in terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is at liberty to file a representation before the concerned Superintendent of Police and the Investigating Officer within three weeks, enclosing a web copy of the order dated 13-2-2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).

Key takeaways

The concerned Superintendent of Police shall ensure that the Investigating Officer of the case strictly adheres to the directions contained in the order dated 13-2-2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Satyavrat Verma, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No.67995 of 2024, decided 09-04-2025 (oral order): Anticipatory bail application of Subodh Kumar Mahto in connection with Madhepur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2024, District Madhubani (offences under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506 and 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act) disposed of in terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar), the learned APP having submitted — undisputed by either side — that the offences carry punishment of less than seven years. Petitioner permitted to file a representation before the concerned Superintendent of Police and Investigating Officer within three weeks with a web copy of the Naushad Ansari order; Superintendent of Police directed to ensure the Investigating Officer strictly adheres to the directions in that order. Recorded that investigation was continuing without any notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. having been issued to the petitioner.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67995 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2024 Thana- MADHEPUR District- Madhubani

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

Subodh Kumar Mahto S/O Baidhnath Mahto Resident Of Village- Nawada, P.S- Madhepur, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2. Anita Devi W/O Subodh Kumar Mahto R/O Village- Nawada, P.SMadhepur, Distt.- Madhubani.

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Prakash, Adv Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Adv Mr. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman, Adv ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

4 09-04-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State, Shri Chandra Bhushan Prasad, and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OP No. 2.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Madhepur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The learned APP, at the outset, submits that the offences for which the instant FIR has been instituted, carries punishment of less than seven years, the said submission of the learned APP is not disputed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and OP No. 2.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67995 of 2024(4) dt.09-04-2025 2/2

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that investigation in the case against the petitioner is still continuing but then the petitioner has not been given notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C, on which the learned APP submits that the case be disposed of in terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).

5. In view of the submission made by the learned APP, the anticipatory bail application is disposed of in terms of the order dated 13-2-2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).

6. The petitioner would be at liberty to file a representation before the concerned Superintendent of Police and the Investigating Officer of the case, within a period of three weeks from today, with a web copy of the order dated 13-2-2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the state of Bihar); and the concerned Superintendent of Police shall ensure that the Investigating Officer of the case strictly adheres to the directions contained in the order dated 13-2-2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024 (Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar).

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

SUMIT/-

U T