Dilip Poddar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9224 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2020 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District- Saharsa ====================================================== Dilip Poddar Son of Binod Poddar @ Vinod Poddar Resident of Village - Maura Bazar, Ward No.- 7, P.S.- Sonvarsa (Kashanagar O.P.), District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rina Devi Wife of Dilip Poddar D/o Ganga Poddar, Resident of Village - Maruahi, P.S.- Puraini, P.O.- Auray, District - Madhepura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Anant Kumar 1, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1,APP For the O.P.2 :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioner, husband of the opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against petitioner is of matrimonial cruelty and demand of dowry.

4. While denying the allegations made in the complaint petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he happens to be husband of opposite party no. 2. He neither demanded any dowry nor committed torture with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9224 of 2023(4) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 opposite party no. 2 and is still ready to keep the opposite party no. 2 with full honour and dignity. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has also filed a matrimonial case, vide Matrimonial Case No. 08 of 2022, before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saharsa under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right. Moreover, the case is triable by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner has further 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.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let this petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Complaint Case No. 102/2020, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T