Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Shahrukh Ansari Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2026)

Home
Patna HC
2026
Shahrukh Ansari Vs The State of BiharShahrukh Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Allowed¶22

Shahrukh Ansari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Mar 2026CR. MISC./12659/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court Criminal Miscellaneous No.12659 of 2026, order dated 10-03-2026, Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey. Bail allowed to Shahrukh Ansari in Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024, District Banka (BNS 2023 Ss. 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351, 3(5); Dowry Prohibition Act Ss. 3/4). Allegations: dowry demand, Talak pronounced on non-fulfillment, confinement and armed assault on informant's family. Counsel: Md. Nurul Hoda (petitioner); Prem Kumar Jha, APP (State). Factors noted: compromise petition in trial court, wife living with petitioner, custody since 06.10.2025, no criminal antecedent claimed. Relief: bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two like sureties to CJM, Banka.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024.

Why is it important?

Having considered the facts and circumstances, the Court inclined to grant bail: petitioner directed to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024. ¶22

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused in Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 (offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) BNS 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act), should be enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Having considered the facts and circumstances, the Court inclined to grant bail: petitioner directed to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED (Patna High Court, Cr. Misc. No.12659 of 2026, decided 10-03-2026, Ashok Kumar Pandey, J). Petitioner Shahrukh Ansari, in judicial custody since 06.10.2025 with no criminal antecedent stated, sought bail in Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 (Dist. Banka) registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Prosecution alleged dowry demand, pronouncement of Talak on non-fulfillment, and confinement and assault with dangerous weapons causing serious injuries to the informant's father. Counsel pleaded innocence, false implication, matrimonial dispute, compromise petition filed in the trial court and wife living with petitioner; APP opposed. Court enlarged the petitioner on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12659 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2024 Thana- BARAHAT District- Banka

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

Shahrukh Ansari Son of Husain Ansari R/o Village - Chilmil, P.S. - Barahat, Dist. - Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

Soni Khatoon Wife of Shahrukh Ansari R/o Village - Chilmil, P.S. - Barahat, Dist. - Banka.

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Nurul Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

2 10-03-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner has demanded dowry, and on non-fulfillment of dowry, the petitioner has pronounced Talak upon his wife. It is further alleged that when the victim informed her parents and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12659 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026 2/3

family members and they reached the matrimonial house, they were confined inside the house and were being assaulted with dangerous weapons, causing serious injuries to the father of the informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that it is just a case of matrimonial dispute. He further submits that parties have compromised the case and have also filed a compromise petition in the learned trial court. He also submits that his wife is living with him. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent is languishing in judicial custody since 06.10.2025.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12659 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026 3/3

Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case

No. 271 of 2024.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Sudhanshu/-

U T

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, accused in Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 (offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) BNS 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act), should be enlarged on bail.¶15
The court held
Having considered the facts and circumstances, the Court inclined to grant bail: petitioner directed to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024.ratio¶22

Statutes considered

10 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023126(2)¶16 115(2)¶16 118(2)¶16 109¶16 85¶16 352¶16 351¶16 3(5)¶16
Dowry Prohibition Act3¶16 4¶16

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 (Thana Barahat, District Banka) registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.¶16
Prior proceeding
Prosecution case: petitioner demanded dowry and, on non-fulfillment, pronounced Talak upon his wife.¶17
Prior proceeding
Prosecution case (continued): family members who reached the matrimonial house were allegedly confined and assaulted with dangerous weapons, causing serious injuries to the father of the informant.¶19
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's counsel submitted that the parties have compromised the case and filed a compromise petition in the trial court.¶20
Prior proceeding
Statement in para 3 of the petition: petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 06.10.2025.¶20
Prior proceeding
Counsel submitted that the petitioner's wife is living with him.¶20

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Shahrukh Ansari Son of Husain Ansari, R/o Village - Chilmil, P.S. - Barahat, Dist. - Banka¶4
Md. Nurul Hoda
respondent
The State of Bihar¶7
Prem Kumar Jha
respondent
Soni Khatoon Wife of Shahrukh Ansari, R/o Village - Chilmil, P.S. - Barahat, Dist. - Banka¶8

Coram

AI extract

Ashok Kumar Pandeyauthor¶11

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Patna HC
Decided on: 10 Mar 2026 · March
Registered: 17 Feb 2026
Case no.: CR. MISC./12659/2026
CNR: BRHC010163572026
Topic: Dowry and Cruelty
Bench: Ashok Kumar Pandey
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: Criminal Miscellaneous

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Ashok Kumar Pandey

Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Yadav Vs The State of Bihar
9 Mar 2026
Ashutosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar
9 Mar 2026
Ram Das @ Ram Das Sah @ Ramdash Sah Vs The State of Bihar
9 Mar 2026
Ram Babu Paswan Vs The State of Bihar
10 Mar 2026
Dipu Tiwari @ Onkar Nath Tiwari @ Tipu Tiwari @ Dipul Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar
10 Mar 2026
Jairam Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar
10 Mar 2026

Cite this judgement

Shahrukh Ansari v. The State of Bihar, CR. MISC./12659/2026 (PAT), decided on 10 March 2026.

The Patna High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes10

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023126(2) · 115(2) · 118(2) · 109 · 85 · 352 · 351 · 3(5)
Dowry Prohibition Act3 · 4

View all statutes

Procedural history6

Barahat P.S. Case No. 271 of 2024 (Thana Barahat, District Banka) registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 85, 352, 351 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Prosecution case: petitioner demanded dowry and, on non-fulfillment, pronounced Talak upon his wife.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Ashok Kumar Pandey

Parties & counsel