Bhushan Kumar Shrivastawa @ Bhushan Shrivastawa v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8778 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2018 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Bhushan Kumar Shrivastawa @ Bhushan Shrivastawa Son of Umesh Kumar Shrivastawa, Residing at Ganesh Nagar Complex, Pandey Nagar, Near Hanuman Mandir, Police Station- Ganesh Nagar, Dist- East Delhi. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Satya Prakash For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner apprehend his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Informant in her written complaint has alleged that she was married to petitioner on 21.12.2017 according to hindu rites and customs and on next day she went to her matrimonial home and stayed for 22 days and thereafter left for Delhi with petitioner and her Mother-in-Law, and for two days they behaved properly, however, thereafter it is further alleged that FIR named accused started torturing her for non fulfillment of demand of dowry of Rs. 1,50,000/- and motorcycle. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8778 of 2019(4) dt.24-01-2020 2/3 alleged that the widowed Sister-in-Law runs a dance bar and she was being compelled to dance as such she was forced to go to her parental house on 06.01.2018. Her written complaint is contradictory as according to her complaint she went to sasural on 22.12.2017 and returned back on 06.01.2018 as such she stayed in her sasural for 15 days.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that allegations are false and concocted. Petitioner never demanded any dowry or subjected informant to any torture and thereafter she has implicated all the family members of the petitioner. It is further stated that she left her matrimonial home on 06.01.2018. Notices were issued to O.P. No. 2 but in spite of valid service of notice she had chosen not to appear in this court. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.
Considering the nature of allegation which is vague and indefinite and no particular date or instance of torture has been disclosed in the FIR, let the petitioner named above be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending, in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8778 of 2019(4) dt.24-01-2020 3/3 Sasaram Model P.S. Case No. 114 of 2018, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U