Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78944 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA PS District- East Champaran
Dr. Rajeev Kumar Verma @ Rajeev Kumar Verma, aged about 35 years,
Male, son of Dr. Chandra Mohan Kumar Verma, resident of village and P.O.-
Pachpakri, P.S.- Dhaka, District- East Champaran.
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ankita Sinha, aged about 28 years (female), D/o Hemant Kumar Sinha,
resident of Mohalla- Chandmari, P.S.- Town, District- East Champaran.
… … Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
For the OP No. 2 : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-07-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned senior
counsel along with Mr. Virendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner; Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State
and Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for the opposite
party no. 2-informant.
3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Motihari Mahila PS Case No. 36 of 2019 dated 29.06.2019,
instituted under Sections 341, 342, 323, 354, 354-A, 406, 328,
498-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
2/7
Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Dowry
Act’).
4. The allegation against the petitioner and others is
that in the marriage of the informant with him on 01.05.2015,
cash of rupees five lakhs, fridge and gadget worth rupees two
lakh and also ornaments of gold and silver worth rupees five
lakhs as also clothes worth rupees one lakh was given by the
family of the informant, but when she went to the matrimonial
home then she was tortured and that there was demand of a
four-wheeler and on the informant’s father not being able to
meet the demand, the accused had started mental and physical
torture and also used to give various types of injections and
medicines due to which her general health and mental condition
also deteriorated. It is further stated that faced with the
circumstances, the father of the informant had taken the
informant and the petitioner to Ranchi and the Psychiatrist had
opined that the informant does not suffer from any disease and
should not be given any medication otherwise, it may affect her
brain. It is further alleged that when the informant again went to
the matrimonial home, the same medicines were given to her
and she was tortured in various ways and that the husband of the
sister of the petitioner finding her alone had entered into her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
3/7
room and tried to outrage her modesty, but on cry raised had
fled away. Finally, it has been stated that in December, 2018,
after snatching the belongings of the informant worth rupees
five lakhs and mobile phone by the sister of the petitioner, she
was ousted and since then she is living in her parents’ house.
Finally, it has been stated that inspite of several efforts from the
side of the informant’s family, the accused were not ready to
keep her.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the informant is not well, both mentally and physically. It was
submitted that she has serious mental issues and that she is not
in a position to enter into conjugal relationship. Learned counsel
submitted that due to such condition and also non-cooperation
from the side of the informant and her family members, the
petitioner has filed Matrimonial Divorce Case No. 35 of 2019
on 19.01.2019 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, East
Champaran at Motihari, for dissolution of marriage. It was
submitted that after notice by publication in the daily newspaper
was made on 29.06.2019, the present case has been instituted
only to harass and extort money from the petitioner’s family.
Learned counsel submitted that there is vague and omnibus
allegation against the petitioner and his family members. It was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
4/7
contended that the Courts have now realized that there is misuse
of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and provisions of the
6. Learned APP submitted that the present is not a fit
case for grant of anticipatory bail as the allegations are very
correct of forcibly administering medicines which has adverse
affect, both on the brain as well as the body and the allegations
made appears to be correct without any exaggeration.
7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that
the petitioner and his family members had become greedy upon
receiving good amount during marriage and had started
demanding four wheeler, but the father of the informant not
being in a position could not fulfill the same due to which the
petitioner, who is a MBBS Doctor, knowing fully well the
consequences, had tried to create a situation and make the
informant mentally infirm so as to have a ground to divorce her,
which actually he did and even in the divorce petition, such
ground of mental infirmity has been taken up. Learned counsel
submitted that the allegation of present case being filed as a
counter blast to the divorce case is totally false for the reason
that the paper publication of the notice in the divorce case was
made on 02.08.2019 after it was signed by the Court on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
5/7
30.07.2019, whereas, the present has been filed much earlier on
29.06.2019 itself. Learned counsel submitted that the Court
earlier had got an exercise conducted by sending both the parties
to the Ranchi Institute of Neuro-Psychiatry and Allied Sciences
for getting opinion with regard to the mental condition of the
informant and the report has come that she is mentally fit. Thus,
it was submitted that the entire allegations and the basis of the
divorce case has been falsified. Learned counsel submitted that
the petitioner and his family members have made up their mind
that they would not keep the informant basically because of
their greed for money as otherwise, there is no other
justification for the same.
8. Earlier, the Court on a number of occasions,
basically on the stand by learned counsel for the petitioner for
working out an amicable settlement, had been adjourning the
matter. Finally, the offer made by the petitioner being too low
was not accepted by the informant and the terms for such
settlement from the side of the informant were not accepted by
the petitioner. The Court would record here that basically the
dispute related to the ornaments which had been given by the
side of the informant to the informant, which according to her
remained in her matrimonial home i.e., the house of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
6/7
petitioner as she had not brought them back, whereas, the claim
by the petitioner’s side is that she had taken all her ornaments
with her. Here, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, with
whom the father of the petitioner was present, stated that they
have got one gold chain set with them which they were prepared
to return.
9. The Court would indicate that the initial stand on
behalf of the petitioner that all the ornaments of the informant
had been taken away by her falls flat by very admission that the
petitioner’s side has got one gold chain set with them. Further,
if, at all, the petitioner’s side had no business or concern with
the ornaments of the informant, then there was no occasion for
them to come up with the stand that they have one gold chain
set with them since whatever had been kept by the informant in
her room or wherever, the petitioner’s family was not entitled to
take them out so as to aware what was kept, but being aware of
the presence of one gold chain set indicates that all the
ornaments of the informant had not been taken back by her and
the same remained in the matrimonial home.
10. Be that as it may, the Court would not go into that
aspect as the parties are fully aware of the truth as it is within
their personal knowledge. However, the Court would only
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78944 of 2019 dt.09-07-2021
7/7
indicate that whatever has been submitted before the Court and
the materials brought on record as also taking into account the
report of the Psychiatric Institute at Ranchi, it appears that the
informant does not suffer from any mental condition so as to
certify her to be unfit to perform the role of a wife. Moreover,
the allegations made in the FIR, cannot, at this stage, be said to
be exaggerated or unbelievable.
11. Thus, taking over all view in the matter, the Court
is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
12. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
13. Interim protection given to the petitioner under
order dated 04.12.2019 stands vacated.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
J. Alam/-
AFR/NAFR
U
T