Anil Kumar v. State of Jharkhand & Anr. (Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4862 of 2025)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Coram: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih
Date of Decision: 29 July 2025
Facts:
- The appellant, Anil Kumar, is accused in a case involving Sections 498A, 323, 313, 506, 307, and 34 of the IPC, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- He had approached the High Court of Jharkhand seeking pre-arrest bail.
- The High Court granted him anticipatory bail on the condition that he resumes conjugal life with his wife (respondent no. 2) and maintains her with dignity and honour.
Issue:
Whether the High Court was justified in imposing a condition requiring the appellant to resume conjugal relations and maintain his wife while granting anticipatory bail.
Supreme Court Findings:
- The Supreme Court held that while granting anticipatory bail, courts can impose only those conditions traceable to Section 438(2) CrPC.
- A condition compelling the accused to resume conjugal life goes beyond those permissible conditions and is impermissible under law.
- Relying on Mahesh Chandra v. State of U.P. and Munish Bhasin v. State (NCT of Delhi), the Supreme Court observed that such a condition could generate further litigation and disputes unsuitable for anticipatory bail proceedings.
- The High Court should have decided the bail application purely on its merits.
Order:
- The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s impugned order.
- Restored the anticipatory bail application (A.B.A. No. 4200/2024) to the High Court’s file for fresh consideration on its own merits.
- Interim protection granted earlier to the appellant would continue until the High Court decides the matter afresh.
- Pending applications were disposed of.
Click here to read/download the order
