← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26488/2025bail granted

Ravi Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-20Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26488 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2199 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria ====================================================== Ravi Kumar Singh Son of Gayanand singh Resident of village -Rampur Mohanpur, ward no 08, police station-Araria, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Meera Devi Daughter of Mahesh Lal Choudhary Resident of village -Rampur Mohanpur, ward no 08, police station-Araria, District- Araria At P/A- Village- Chakai, Ward no. 07, ps- Jokihat, Dist- Araria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2199 C of 2023 instituted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the marriage took place in the year 2022 but she was always tortured for dowry. The petitioner closed the room and after tying her hands and legs assaulted her. The complainant further alleged that subsequently upon information to the parents, Panchayati took place, not accepted by them, again assaulted

2/4 and thrown out of the house which followed the complaint.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he always wanted to keep the lady with full dignity and honour and in that background, the coordinate bench issued notice to her on 07.05.2025.

5. The office report shows that it has been validly served upon her though there is no appearance.

6. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that to his information as made available from the side of the petitioner, the lady has moved to her husband's house and both are residing happily. He further submits that the husband shall desist from doing anything detrimental to her dignity and honour.

7. Learned APP though opposes the prayer submitting that as the lady has moved to her husband's house, an opportunity can be extended.

8. Taking into account the aforesaid facts specially the contention that the lady has now been taken to her husband's house as recorded above, an undertaking has been given that she shall be kept with dignity and honour, despite notice, there is no appearance, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail. If however, it is found that the contention

3/4 regarding the presence of the lady at the in-laws house is incorrect, the order shall become infructuous.

9. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the subordinate court within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Complaint Case No. 2199 C of 2023 to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Araria, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other conditions.

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation and make himself available to the police as and when required; (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

4/4 failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T