Md. Mumtaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6619 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2017 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== MD. MUMTAZ ALAM, Son of Md. Nabi Hussain, Resident of Mohalla - Naya Sumdhana, P.S.- Bhadrawati, Distt - Chandrapura (Maharastra) Commercial Address Aman Garments, Jama Masjid, Main Road, P.S. and P.O. - Bhadrawati, Distt - Chandrapur, (Maharastra) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shahira Parveen, D/o Md. Unus Alam, Wife of Md. Mumtaz Alam, Resident of Algyas Nagar West of Ray Chouk, P.O. and P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, Distt - Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Yadav, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kumarn (APP) For the Informant :

Mr. S. Akhtar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-06-2020 The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 498(A), 323, 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against petitioner is of torturing for nonfulfillment of demand of dowry and she was ousted from her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6619 of 2020(2) dt.30-06-2020 2/3 matrimonial house.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner had always taken care of the complainant being his wife and even he brought her to place of his Job, Bhadrawati (Maharastra) but the complainant could not adjust there. It is further started that complainant started to make pressure upon the petitioner to settle at Naihar of the complainant, but he refused for the same and to pressurise on the petitioner, this complaint case has been filed by the complainant by creating false story. The petitioner further undertakes to make payment of Rs. 1500/- (one thousand five hundred) per months to the complainant as maintenance by 2nd week of every succeeding month till any interim/final order is passed in maintenance case. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the undertaking of the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 1500/- (one thousand five hundred) per months to the complainant as maintenance, let the petitioner named above be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6619 of 2020(2) dt.30-06-2020 3/3 weeks from today, on 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 Complaint Case No. 290(C) of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C with following conditions:

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(4) Petitioner will keep on paying maintenance amount by 15th of every month till passing of order of interim/final order in maintenance case and in failure to pay maintenance amount, bail of petitioner shall be cancelled. (S. Kumar, J) Rajiv/veena U T