Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85800 of 2025 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5388 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-942 Year-2019 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE District- Nawada ====================================================== Santosh Kumar son of Kuldeep Mahto @ Kuldip Mahto Village- Jagdishpur PS -Sikandra District -Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Rishav Dev, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for modification of order dated 06.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5388 of 2023 whereby the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail with a condition to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand rupees) per month, as interim solace/maintenance, in the bank account of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of aforesaid order, petitioner is regularly paying aforesaid amount in the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2 but the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 does not wants to live

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85800 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2026 2/2 with this petitioner and has already solemnized second marriage and, therefore, the order dated 06.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5388 of 2023 requires modification, so far as payment of Rs. 5,000/-, as maintenance, is concerned.

4. This Court, while allowing pre-arrest bail to the petitioner vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5388 of 2023, on the submission of petitioner himself, had directed him to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as interim relief/solace to Opposite Party No.2 with observation that the aforesaid payment will be subject to any order passed in the maintenance case for final settlement. The issue of maintenance or the fact that the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 has already solemnized second marriage cannot be decided by this Court. It can only be decided by the concerned Court at the stage of trial after giving full opportunity to both the parties and as such, the modification petition cannot be allowed on this ground alone.

5. Accordingly, this modification petition is dismissed.

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