Naveen Kumar Yadav @ Navinder Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9787 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2021 Thana- BABUBARHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

NAVEEN KUMAR YADAV @ NAVINDER YADAV SON OF LATE BRAHMDEO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- KHAJPUR, BABHANTOLI, P.S.- BABUBARAHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI 2.

LALDEO YADAV @ LAL DEV YADAV SON OF LATE MITHU YADAV R/O VILLAGE- MAJHAO, P.S.- BABUBARAHI, DISTRICTMADHUBANI 3.

RAKESH KUMAR YADAV @ RAKESH KUMAR ROUSHAN SON OF LALDEO YADAV @ LAL DEV YADAV R/O VILLAGE- MAJHAO, P.S.- BABUBARAHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 498(A) & other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

As per the F.I.R., petitioners and F.I.R. named persons are alleged to have committed torture and assault on the informant, due to non-fulfillment of additional demand of one 4wheeler, as dowry. Petitioner no. 1 is brother, petitioner no. 2 is maternal grandfather and petitioner no. 3 is maternal uncle of husband of informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9787 of 2022(3) dt.04-08-2022 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that thrust of the accusation is against co-accused Surendra Kumar, who is husband of the informant. So far as petitioners are concerned, there is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioners are separate in mess & property and have got no concern with the family affairs of informant and her husband. They have clean antecedent.

However, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that petitioners are also named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.- 1st, Madhubani in connection with Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 209 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T