Pawan Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8839 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2021 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran ====================================================== PAWAN SAH S/o Chhatu Sah R/o village- Medhuka, P.S.- Sahajitpur, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sunita Kumari W/o Pawan Sah, D/o Raj Kishor Sah R/o village- Bhatoura, P.S.- Taraiya, Distt.- Saran at Chapra ... ... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Renu Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within four weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Taraiya P.S. Case No. 87/21 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A & 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

All the accused persons including this petitioner is said to have tied the legs and hand of the daughter of the informant thrown from roof and asked to sleep with the friend

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8839 of 2022(3) dt.18-10-2022 2/2 of the petitioner. They also demanded rupees two lakhs. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is the husband of the daughter of the informant and he always ready to keep her with full honor and dignity. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner in association of other coaccused, he does not deserve anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T