Prince Kumar Singh @ Prince Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52984 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2378 Year-2022 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== Prince Kumar Singh @ Prince Kumar Son of Kanhaiya Singh Resident of Village - Dinapatti, P.O.- Bharatpura, P.S.- G.B. Nagar, Tarwara, District - Siwan, Bihar - 841506.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shilpi Kumari, Wife of Prince Kumar Singh @ Prince Kumar, D/o- Rahgo Thakur, Resident of Village - Pachkandha, P.S.- Masrakh, District - Saran, Chapra, Bihar - 841417, M- 9043886329.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Akshay Ashish, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Harsh Anuj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Complaint Case No.2378 of 2022, dated-29.07.2022, filed for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 341, 504, 506, and 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and later on cognizance has been taken under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act.

3. As per allegation, the Complainant is the wife of the Petitioner and the marriage between them was solemnized in the year 2018 and she joined the matrimonial home of the

2/4 Petitioner. However, soon thereafter, demand of motorcycle started as an additional demand of dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was harassed by the Petitioner and his family members and ultimately she was ousted from the matrimonial home.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that on account of normal wear and tear of the married life, marriage is not working and this false case has been filed against the Petitioner. He also submits that the maximum punishment prescribed for the alleged offence is three years.

5. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 24.04.2025.

6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.

8. However, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the Complainant vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Learned counsel for the

3/4 Complainant submits that the Complainant has been harassed by the Petitioner for non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry. He also submits they frequently compromise the matter, take the Complainant to the matrimonial home and again oust her. He further submits that she is ready to go the matrimonial home but the Petitioner is interested to keep her, nor he is paying any maintenance to her.

9. It appears that there is matrimonial dispute between the parties and the parties have remedy by way of filing appropriate application before the Family Court.

10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, abovenamed, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court below in connection with Complaint Case No.2378 of 2022 on the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police

4/4 or the court whenever his presence is required. (iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.

(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Jitendra Kumar, J.) Chandan/- U T