Masomat Tetri Khatoon @ Tetri Khatoon And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2706 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- MADHEPURA ======================================================

1. Masomat Tetri Khatoon @ Tetri Khatoon wife of Late Md. Makbool

2. Md. Riayaz Son of Late Md. Makbool

3. Raushan Khatoon Wife of Md. Riayaz

4. Md. Jameer Son of Md. Riayaz

5. Md. Parwaz Son of Md. Riayaz

6. Md. Jawaid Son of Md. Riayaz All residents of Village - Jitapur, Ward No. 02, Police Station - Murliganj, District - Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar & Uday Chand Pd. Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kr. Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Madhepura Mahila P.S. Case No. 64 of 2016 for the offences punishable under sections 498 (A), 323, 379 and 494/34 of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The informant was married to Md. Shamsher who is the son of petitioner nos. 2 and 3 on 17.02.2011 and due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of Rs. 1,00,000/- the petitioners and her husband started torturing and assaulting her

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2706 of 2017 (2) dt.28-01-2017 2/2 and further tried to administer poison to her and ultimately they ousted her from the in-laws house after snatching the ornaments. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioners are in-laws having no concern with the family affairs of the informant and her husband, the allegations are general and omnibus in nature and as such the petitioners deserve sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that the petitioners are in-laws, there is no injury report and as such the petitioners, in case of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of. S.D.J.M. Madhepura in connection with above mentioned case, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T