Patna High Court – Orders
Pintu Kumar Sao vs The State Of Bihar on 15 July, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24043 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1322 Year-2023 Thana- BHOJPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Pintu Kumar Sao Son of Vijay Sao R/o Village - Akhgaon, P.S. - Sandesh,
Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priti Kumari R/o Village - Akhgaon, P.S. - Sandesh, Dist. - Bhojpur at
present D/o Umesh Sao @ Umesh Sah, R/o Village - Phulari, P.S. - Sandesh,
Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 15-07-2026
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2
and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection
with Complaint Case no. 1322 C of 2023, registered under
Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 379, 498 (A), 504, 506, 34 of
Indian Penal Code and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. That the prosecution allegations as per the
complaint filed by the complainant is that, her marriage was
solemnized on 28.11.2021 and after marriage she went to her
matrimonial home. She lived there for about two months and
thereafter the petitioner and other co-accused persons started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24043 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026
2/5
demanding dowry to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the
complainant. When the demand of the petitioner and others was
not fulfilled, they started torturing, abusing and assaulting the
complainant and used to keep her without any food. When her
parents objected to her being ill treated, the accused persons
informed that till of demand of dowry will not be fulfilled, the
complainant will not be allowed to live in her matrimonial
home. It is further alleged that the accused persons also took her
signature on two blank sheets of paper and ousted her from her
matrimonial house on 28.03.2022. The petitioner at that time
was pregnant and when the father of the complainant requested
the accused persons to perform vidai, a panchayati was also
held, but nothing fruitful came. It has been further alleged in the
complaint petition that on 01.09.2022, the complainant gave
birth to a girl child, however the petitioner or the other co-
accused persons never came to see the new-born baby. The
complainant went to her matrimonial house on 03.07.2023,
however after one week the accused persons, including the
petitioner, again started torturing and assaulting the
complianant. On 01.08.2023 when the complainant was
confined in a room, she called her father at around 11:00 in the
night. Thereafter the father of the complainant came along with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24043 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026
3/5
the police and took her with him.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is the husband and no demand of dowry has been
made from the complainant. He submits that the petitioner is
still ready and willing to keep the complainant as his wife and
the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation
Center, where mediation was also held in between the parties,
however the matter could not be settled through the process of
mediation and the mediator sent his report on 23.06.2026. The
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is still ready
and willing to reconcile the matter, however the complainant is
not ready to live with her. He further submits that the petitioner
is an accused in one another case filed by the complainant
bearing Sandesh P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the complainant/opposite party no. 2 submits that the
complainant wants to live with her husband (petitioner therein),
however due to torture and assault it is not possible to live with
the petitioner. He submits that a Maintenance Case No. 93 0f
2023 is pending in between the parties, wherein on the date
fixed i.e. 23.08.2024, the complainant went with her husband
but on the same day she was assaulted by the petitioner, for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24043 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026
4/5
which she was forced to lodge Sandesh P.S. Case No. 246 of
2024.
6. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
also opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the rival submissions and after going
through the records, it appears that the petitioner is ready to
reconcile the matter and to keep the complainant as his wife,
however as per the statement given by the learned counsel for
the complainant, on her instructions, she is not ready to go with
her husband on account of fear of assault and torture.
Considering the above, let the petitioner, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in
connection with Complaint Case no. 1322 C of 2023, on each of
them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bhojpur at
Ara, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C., and subject to the following conditions:-
(I) That the learned court concerned shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it
is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24043 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026
5/5antecedent, the court concerned shall take step for cancellation
of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail
bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
shital/-
U T
