Ranjit Sah @ Ranjit Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85626 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-536 Year-2022 Thana- DARBHANGA COMPLAINT CASE District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Ranjit Sah @ Ranjit Kumar Sahu S/O Kaleshwar Sah Resident of VillageRaiyam, P.S- Bhairav Asthan, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Nitu Devi Wife of Ranjit Sah Resident of Village- Raiyam, P.S- Bhairav Asthan, District- Madhubani, presently Daughter of Manoj Sah, Resident of Mohalla-Balbhadhrapur, Navtole, Near Ram Janaki Temple, P.SBahadurpur, District-Darbhanga. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Complainant :
Mt. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 494, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and he is husband of the complainant.
3. The instant case arises out of the complaint filed by the opposite party no.2, wife of the petitioner, alleging therein that there was demand of dowry and the consequent torture upon her.
4. The matter had earlier been referred to the Mediation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85626 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 Centre, Patna High Court for resolving the dispute between the parties. The report received from the Mediation Centre, however, discloses that the said mediation between the parties failed.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are not correct and as a matter of fact, the petitioner has always been ready to keep his wife (complainant) with due dignity and honour and it is the complainant who is not desirous of staying in her matrimonial house.
6. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel appearing for the complainant, however, oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner makes an offer that the petitioner would make the payment of Rs.4000.00/- (Rupees Four Thousand) per month to the complainant in the second week of every month.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85626 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 536 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
9. It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceedings.
10. Learned counsel for the complainant is directed to furnish the bank account details of the complainant in the learned Court below. If the complainant fails to furnish the same, the aforesaid amount will be deposited in the learned Court below which will be released in favour of the complainant after she furnishes her bank account details. If the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid amount on two consecutive months, the complainant shall be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner.
11. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T