Raunak Kumar @ Tulsi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54502 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Banka ====================================================== Raunak Kumar @ Tulsi S/o Ramjivan Poddar Resident of Village- Kathaun, P.S.- Rajoun, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The state of Bihar 2.
Prerna Priya @ Divya Kumari D/o Jawahar Poddar R/o Vill- Kaushalpur, P.S. - Amarpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Swapnil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner, being husband, has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the complainant. It is next submitted that the relationship in between the petitioner and the complainant has soured to an extent where it is not
2/4 possible to revive the conjugal relationship. It is also submitted that petitioner has filed a divorce case being Divorce Case No. 244 of 2024 which is pending in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Banka. It is next submitted that petitioner was aggrieved by the complainant as she used to talk to one Banti Poddar, for which a Panchayati was held and an agreement was entered in between the petitioner and the O.P. No. 2 and on the agreement paper, the father of the O.P. No. 2 had also signed. It is submitted that petitioner for the present is not making any submissions based on Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application. It is next submitted that O.P. No. 2 has also filed a maintenance case being Maintenance Case No. 147 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Banka.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner next submits that he has instructions to make submission that petitioner is willing to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 6,000/- to the O.P. No. 2 till the maintenance case/divorce case is not decided.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2 also based on instructions submits that since petitioner is willing to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 6,000/- to the O.P.
3/4 No. 2, as such, he has instructions not to oppose the anticipatory bail.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2 further submits that he will Whatsapp the bank account number of the O.P. No. 2 on the Whatsapp number of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner undertakes to communicate the same to the petitioner so that the monthly maintenance, as agreed, commences from 01.09.2025.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No. 201 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
8. However, it is made clear that the O.P. No. 2 shall be at liberty to file an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner in
4/4 the event if the petitioner does not deposit the amount of monthly maintenance, as agreed, for two consecutive months.
9. It is further made clear that the present maintenance will stop, the moment the maintenance case is finally decided by a Court of competent jurisdiction. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T