Raman Sahani @ Raban Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6511 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1962 Year-2018 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RAMAN SAHANI @ RABAN SAHNI Son of Kokai Sahani Resident of Village - Haththa, P.S.- Pear, Distt - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.
Renu Devi Wife of Raman Sahani @ Raban Sahni Sahni Presently living with father Gahil Sahni at Village - Gonoura, P.S.- Chakmehsi, Distt - Samastipur.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 01-09-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner in this application prays for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case no.1962 of 2018 (Trial no. 3431 of 2018) wherein cognizance was taken under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused persons as also under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code against accused Roshan Kumar.
3. As per allegation in the complaint, the complainant was married to the petitioner on 22.6.2017. Soon after the marriage, the accused persons started to physically and mentally torture the complainant for nonfulfilment of demand of dowry to the tune of Rs.1 lakh. She was assaulted, her ornaments were taken
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6511 of 2020(13) dt.01-09-2023 2/3 way and she was forced out of the home.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after enquiry, the learned Court below by order dated 4.10.2018 passed in Complaint Case no.1962 of 20018 was pleased to take cognizance only under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, so far as this petitioner is concerned. The allegations as narrated in the complaint are all false and concocted and it is for this reason that cognizance has not been taken under the other sections. It is further submitted that a supplementary affidavit has been filed categorically stating therein that the complainant has solemnized marriage with one another person, details of whom has been given in paragraph no.2 thereof. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioner together with the material available on record including the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6511 of 2020(13) dt.01-09-2023 3/3 within a period of six weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case no. 1962 of 2018 (Trial no. 3431 of 2018) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Muzaffarpur.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T