Hriday Shah
The Supreme Court, in a matrimonial dispute, overturned a bail condition that required a husband to pay maintenance to his wife as a prerequisite for anticipatory bail. The appellant-husband had approached the Patna High Court, seeking protection from arrest in a case involving charges under Sections 498(A), 504, 379, and 34 of the IPC, along with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
While granting anticipatory bail, the High Court imposed a condition based on the appellant’s expressed willingness that he must deposit Rs. 4,000 per month into his wife’s account. It is further stipulated that failure to make payments for two consecutive months would allow the lower court to cancel his bail bond.
Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. Advocate for the Appellant argued that the marriage was a forced one and that annulment proceedings were going on in the competent court. The complainant-wife did not appear in the case, but the state counsel opposed the appellant’s plea, asserting that the bail condition stemmed from the appellant’s own offer to pay maintenance.
After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court held that the High Court’s imposition of a maintenance condition for granting bail was not merited and set it aside. The High Court ordered the Trial Court to impose appropriate bail condition(s) for the appellant to remain on bail.
Case Name: Srikant Kumar @ Shrikant Kumar v. The State of Bihar & Anr.,
Diary No.: SLP (Crl.) 13083/2023
Bench: Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice S. V. N. Bhatti