Dipak Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10157 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4210 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== DIPAK PRASAD SON OF KEDAR NATH PRASAD @ KEDAR PRASAD R/O VILLAGE- IBRAHIM NAGAR, DHARAHARA, P.S.- TOWN, DISTRICT- ARA AT (BHOJPUR) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

SANGITA @ SANGITA KUMARI @ SANGITA PRASAD WIFE OF DIPAK PRASAD, D/O KAMESHWAR PRASAD R/O MOHALLAADARSH COLONY, WEST PATEL NAGAR, ROAD NO.2, VIVEKANAND MARG, P.O.- KESHARI NAGAR, P.S.- SHASTRI NAGAR, PATNA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Gourav, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP Mr.Rabindra Nath Tiwari, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 498(A) of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his family members subjected the complainant to cruelty due to nonfulfillment of demand of a car in the form of dowry. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to grudge. No such

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10157 of 2023(3) dt.20-06-2023 2/2 occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. Petitioner has never made any demand nor has tormented the complainant over demand of dowry. It is further submitted that petitioner has filed a divorce case and O.P. No.2 has filed a maintenance case, in which, the learned Court below has directed the petitioner to pay Rs.21,000/- as maintenance to the O.P. No.2. Petitioner is paying the said amount to the O.P. No.2. Petitioner has criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this bail application.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No.4210 (C) of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T