Pradeep Chouhan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20646 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2018 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar ====================================================== Pradeep Chouhan Son of Chhunu Choudhary R/o Village - Khemrajpur, P.S. - Dhansoi, Dist. - Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Dhanawati Devi W/o Pradeep Chouhan D/o Chhangur Chaudhary R/o Village - Basaaw Gajrihi, P.S. - Itarhi, Dist. - Buxar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP Mr. Anand Kumar Ojha, Advocate Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case no.117 of 2018 registered under sections 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that she was married to the petitioner. At the time of marriage, various articles by way of dowry were given to the petitioner. It is further stated that the accused persons including the petitioner herein assaulted and tortured her by not giving her food and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20646 of 2026(4) dt.08-07-2026 2/3 medicines. Hence the instant case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of being the husband of the informant. The allegations are absolutely false and concocted and categorically denied. No such occurrence as alleged in the FIR has taken place. The petitioner is in custody since 9.12.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the informant. On the material that has transpired in course of investigation, cognizance has been taken in the learned Court below.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegations against the petitioner in the FIR together with the petitioner having remained in custody since 9.12.2025 and chargesheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case no.117 of 2018 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20646 of 2026(4) dt.08-07-2026 3/3 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M, Buxar.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T