Md. Mansoor v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24835 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -82 Year- 2013 Thana -SONBERSA District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Md. Mansoor, son of Md. Aajul, @ Md. Vajul, resident of VillageLoharvar, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2.Mustaqeema Khatoon W/o Md. Mansoor, presently at Village Runnisaidpur, Tola Tijarak Ward No. 3, P.S.-Raunnisaidpur, DistrictSitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashhar Mustafa, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mustaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 82 of 2013 registered under Sections 323, 379, 498-A, 504 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It has been contended that on the basis of compromise between the parties, the petitioner was earlier granted provisional bail upon his surrender by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi vide order dated 27.06.2013. The said provisional bail was being extended from time to time till 3rd April, 2014. On 3rd April, 2014, an application was filed on behalf of the petitioner before the learned Magistrate under

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24835 of 2016 (2) dt.07-06-2016 2/2 Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for dispensing with the personal attendance. The application of the petitioner was opposed by the complainant of the case. The learned Magistrate while rejecting the application filed under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also rejected the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 3rd April, 2014 itself.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by now the petitioner has remained in custody for about three months. He has submitted that there is no truth behind the allegation made in the FIR based on a complaint. The case has been filed by the informant of the case on account of incompatibility.

Be that as it may, regard being had to the nature of allegation as well as other facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 82 of 2013.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Sanjeet/- U T