Dharmendra Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 18 May, 2026

    0
    17
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Dharmendra Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 18 May, 2026

    Author: Ajit Kumar

    Bench: Ajit Kumar

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11157 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-452 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - PATNA CITY
                                                          District- Patna
                     ======================================================
                     Dharmendra Kumar S/O Ramchandra Prasad R/O Vill- Vidhyapuri, P.S-
                     Hilsa, Dist - Nalanda.
    
                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
               1.    The State of Bihar
               2.    Rekha Devi W/O Ranjeet Kumar R/O Mohalla - Tulsi Mandi, P.S -
                     Alamganj, Dist - Patna. At Present resident of Bir, P.S - Dhanarua, Dist -
                     Patna
    
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv.
                     For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    4   18-05-2026

    Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

    learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

    view of the fact that the notices issued to opposite party no. 2

    before the District Court, for securing a participation in the

    proceeding, in which the opposite party no. 2 had not appeared

    and even the notices served upon the opposite party no. 2, as per

    the office report, has been returned with no clear report as to

    why it has been returned and in view of the order passed by this

    Court on 05.05.2026, this case was directed to be listed under

    the heading “Admission”.

    3. Today also, when this matter is called out to verify
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
    2/6

    the appearance on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and in case

    he is called out nobody appeared for opposite party no. 2 and

    accordingly, this case is being heard on merit.

    4. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

    connection with Complaint Case No. 452 of 2023, dated

    18.04.2023 registered for the offences punishable under

    Sections 323, 379, 504, 498(A), 34 of IPC and under Section 3,

    4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

    5. As per prosecution case, sufficient dowry articles

    were given at the time of marriage of complainant’s daughther,

    namely, Ganita Kumari. After marriage, she remained at her

    matrimonial home for about ten days and thereafter returned to

    her parental house. Subsequently, after second marriage

    (Duragaman), a female child was born on 11.04.2019,

    whereafter the accused persons allegedly started subjecting her

    to cruelty and harassment on account of birth of a female child

    and further demanded Rs. 3 lakhs as additional dowry. It is

    further alleged that the accused persons tortured her and

    deprived her of food.

    6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as

    per the allegations levelled in the FIR, it is evident that the

    marriage between the opposite party no. 2 and the petitioner has
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
    3/6

    taken place on 19.04.2018 according to Hindu rites and customs

    and as per the allegation, at the time of marriage the valuables

    and cash were given and immediately after 10 days of marriage,

    the opposite party no. 2 is said to have returned to his parents

    house. Again, after three months, her second marriage was

    performed and one female child blessed from wedlock to the

    Ganita Kumari but because of the torture with her daughter, the

    panchayti is said to have taken place but the assault did not stop

    and even the in-laws used to abuse opposite party no. 2 and

    money was demanded from opposite party no. 2 leading to

    filing of the instant case.

    7. The case of the petitioner is that due to mental

    problems of the petitioner, opposite party no. 2 has herself

    started to disliking this petitioner and contracted another

    marriage in the year 2022 along with Ravi Raj Son of Yogendra

    Prasad, R/O Village Kaushik Nagar, P.S.- Hilsa, District

    Nalanda and permanent address R/O Gosain Math, P.S.- Hilsa,

    District Nalanda and has started residing along with him and

    one female child has also taken birth from second marriage in

    the month of November, 2025 and the instant false case has

    been filed by her mother, namely, Rekha Devi which is false and

    frivolous. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is not
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
    4/6

    mentally fit and his treatment is being given from different

    doctors/hospitals including Mental Hospital, Kanke, Ranchi as

    is being evident from the documents appended with the

    anticipatory bail petition which is appended as Annexure-P/2

    and the opposite party no. 2 herself has refused to reside with

    this petitioner which is evident from the certificates as has been

    provided by Sindhu Kumar, Ward No. 22 of Ward Parishad,

    Hilsa, Nalanda which goes to show that the opposite party no. 2

    is residing along with Ravi Raj and due to mental problem to the

    petitioner, the opposite party no. Ganita Kumari used to dislike

    him and due to such dislike, opposite party no. 2 has contracted

    second marriage and is residing along with him and one female

    child has also taken birth out of the second marriage in the

    month of November, 2025.

    8. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

    anticipatory bail application.

    9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

    that there is already a second marriage contracted and despite

    notices having been issued to opposite party no. 2 in this case,

    he has not ensured the appearance in the present proceeding in

    this Court and also considering the materials available on record

    and looking to the mental conditions as evident from the
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
    5/6

    medical prescriptions appended with the instant bail petition,

    this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to

    the petitioner.

    10. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of

    his/her 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna

    City, in connection with Complaint Case No. 452 of 2023,

    subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

    the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya

    Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-

    (i) one of the bailors should be the family

    member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide

    official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;

    (ii) the petitioner(s) 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/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

    (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

    promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11157 of 2026(4) dt.18-05-2026
    6/6

    failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

    cancellation of the bail bonds;

    (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any

    criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

    to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.

    (Ajit Kumar, J)
    Abhishek/-

    U      T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here