Chaitu Das @ Chaitanya Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62129 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2594 Year-2023 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== Chaitu Das @ Chaitanya Das Son of Aashu Das R/O- Ektalla, P.S.- Barsoi, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Pooja Kumari Das @ Pooja Das Wife of Chaitu Das D/O- Ram Nath Das, R/O- Malikpur, Post - Nimaul, P.S.- Azamnagar, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2025 Despite valid service of notice, none appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. As per prosecution case, all the named accused persons including this petitioner tortured and harassed the complainant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry of Rs. 5 Lacs.

5. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner happens to be husband of the complainant and present case has been lodged due to petty family dispute. There is general and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62129 of 2025(4) dt.18-12-2025 2/2 omnibus allegation of commission of assault against him. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready to keep the complainant, as his wife, with full honour and dignity. It is next submitted that the case is triable by the Magistrate. In this connection, petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with C.A. Case No. 2594 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T