Pintu Ojha @ Shailesh Kumar Ojha @ Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4207 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Pintu Ojha @ Shailesh Kumar Ojha @ Rohit Kumar Son Of Hare Ram Ojha Resident Of Village- Semaria, Ojha Patti, Police Station- Shahpur, DistrictBhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Khushbu Kumari Daughter Of Vijay Shankar Tiwari, Wife Of Pintu Ojha Resident Of Village- Dhamwal, Post Office- Chamarpur, Police StationShahpur, District- Bhojpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr.Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-02-2022 Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding. The matter has been listed under the heading 'For Orders' under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Arrah Mahila P.S. case No.12 of 2021 registered under
2/4 Sections 323, 498A, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case/F.I.R. It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in
3/4 covid cases.
Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, Arrah in connection with Arrah Mahila P.S. case No.12 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.
The petitioner is directed to co-operate during the trial. If the petitioner does not co-operate during the trial, the court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement. In case, any such
4/4 application is made by either of the parties, the court below shall refer the matter to the District Mediation Centre. (Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T