← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56907/2025bail granted

Dinesh Kumar Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-09Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56907 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2025 Thana- CHAINPUR District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Dinesh Kumar Mehta son of Madan Kumar Mehta @ Madan Singh Resident of Village - Majhui, P.S. - Chainpur, District - Kaimur (Bhabua) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Niraj Kumari Maurya Daughter of Dinesh Kumar singh Village- Madurna, Ps- Chainpur, Dist- Kaimur (Bhabua) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Sunil, Advocate Mr. Utkarsh Shandilya, Advocate Mr. Saharsh Shubham, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as also the informant.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 285 of 2025 for the offence under sections 69 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act lodged on 02.06.2025 by the informant, Neeraj Kumari Maurya.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that on the pretext of false promise of marriage, the petitioner came to Varanasi, made physical relationship with her and took her to Agra and Mathura for sight seeing but later, on the pressure of the parents, wanted dowry. This led to the FIR.

2/4

4. Earlier, this Court while granting interim protection to the petitioner sent the matter to the mediation center on 27.08.2025 but as per the Mediator's report dated 10.10.2025, it could not be resolved.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both are major, the relationship was consented and had nothing to do with the marriage. The FIR is there, he shall be facing the trial, undertaking has been given that under no circumstance, the witnesses will be coerced and/or any threat will be made to them failing which the prosecution shall be free to take step for cancellation of bail bond, if relief is granted to him.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, Mr. Pandey, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner under false pretext of marriage, took her to different places, especially Agra (Taj Mahal) and in between, made physical relationship. Later, the parents wanted dowry, they are not in a position to make payment which resulted into the present case.

7. As recorded above, this Court wanted to resolve the issue and sent the matter to the Mediation Center. However, the report shows that they could not come to a conclusion. Both are major, the FIR is there, he will be facing the music and an

3/4 undertaking has been given that he shall be diligently appearing in trial, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender 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 like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate - V, Kaimur (Bhabua) in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 285 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card/Pan Card/Voter I.D. Card/Driving License) 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 in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

4/4 cancellation of the bail bonds;

(iv) 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) Adnan/- U T