Rajesh Kumar Roshan @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18129 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-948 Year-2023 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District- Saharsa ====================================================== Rajesh Kumar Roshan @ Rajesh Kumar S/O Vindhyachal Yadav R/O VillageBhorha, Ward No.-8, P.S- Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Distt.- Saharsa (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Chandani Devi W/O Rajesh Kumar Raushan @ Rajesh Kumar, D/O Umesh Prasad Yadav R/O Village- Bharrahi, Ward No.-3, P.S and Distt.- Saharsa (Bihar).

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-09-2025 Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Center of Patna High Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed (Report kept at flag 'M').

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the opposite party no.2.

3. The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.2, apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 323, 379, 448, 504, 506, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

4. Prosecution case in brief is that opposite party no.2 was married with the petitioner in 2002. After marriage, this petitioner along with other accused persons started demanding colour television and ornaments as dowry and on nonfulfillment of the same they used to assault and torture her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18129 of 2025(4) dt.04-09-2025 2/3 Lastly, accused persons ousted opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while denying the allegations, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case because he happens to be husband of opposite party no.2. Petitioner is ready to keep her with honour and safety. Besides this, petitioner is ready to give Rs. 3000/-per month to opposite party no.2 by way of temporary relief/solace, starting from this month, subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

6. Learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner, being husband of opposite party no.2, in connivance with his family members, subjected her to harassment and cruelty for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also ousted her to her parents' house. It is further submitted that she has two children and has no means of livelihood and is on the verge of starvation.

7. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as condition of 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 the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in Complaint Case No. 948 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as well as on the following conditions:- (i) Opposite party no.2. would file an affidavit before

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18129 of 2025(4) dt.04-09-2025 3/3 the court below and bring on record her saving bank account number for its communication to the petitioner. (ii) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid interim relief per month in the saving bank account of the opposite party no.2.

(iii) In case, petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount of temporary relief/solace for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond. (iv) 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.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T