Ravi Prakash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Chaubey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4049 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran ====================================================== Ravi Prakash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Chaubey Son of Pramod Chaubey R/o Village Gurwaliya Vishwash Ward 02, P.S.- Manuwapul, Dist.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Puja Kumari @ Puja Devi Wife of Raviprakash Kumar @ Vikash Chaubey D/o Braj Kishore Ojha, R/o Mohalla Sagar Phokhara, P.S.- Bettiah Town, District - West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhannjay Kumar Ii, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2026 Heard Mr. Dhannjay Kumar Ii, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Ajay Kumar No.2, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bettiah (M) P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 26.10.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 85(1) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. According to prosecution case, all the accused persons including this petitioner who happens to be the husband

2/4 of the informant abused, assaulted and ousted the informant from her matrimonial house dud non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and this petitioner further solemnized second marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Although learned counsel for the petitioner has not denied the fact that the petitioner has performed second marriage. He further submits on instruction that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 10,000/- as an interim maintenance to the informant, subject to the outcome of the final maintenance case, if any.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have no objection in this regard.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah (M)

3/4 P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall produce a demand draft of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the informant, namely, Puja Kumari @ Puja Devi and the learned Court below is directed to hand over the said demand draft to the informant or her representative at the time of furnishing bail bond. It is further directed that the petitioner shall pay Rs. 10,000/- per month in the bank account of the informant whose details are - Account No. - 444210110013433, IFSC Code- BKI0004442 in the very first week of the every month and if the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid amount to the informant, the informant has liberty to move before the appropriate forum for cancellation of the bail bond of the petitioner.

ii. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. iii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

4/4 move for cancellation of bail.

iv. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T