Channu Rai And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7516 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3535 Year- 2014 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. Channu Rai, son of Late Devendra Rai.
2. Anita Devi, wife of Late Devendra Rai. Both Resident of VillageKanohali, Bishanparsi, P.S. Mahua, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Archna Kumari, wife of Pappu Rai, resident of Village- Kanohali Bishanparsi, P.S. Mahua, District- Vaishali. Maika Address- D/o Virendra Rai Village- Etwarpur Sisola, P.O.- Manikpur Pakri, P.S. Lalganj, DistrictVaishali. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vasant Vikas, Advocate For the Complainant : Mr. Anish Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 22-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. C1-3535 of 2014, corresponding to Trial No. 5917 of 2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and they are brother-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant. Heard learned APP as well as learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7516 of 2017 (2) dt.22-02-2017 2/3 complainant, who has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail stating that earlier in the court below dispute was settled and they undertook to keep the complainant with them but they had not appeared on two dates and thereafter on the direction of the court they have brought the complainant in court and she complained that she was assaulted.
Considering the aforesaid circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner No.2, who is mother-in-law, is rejected. So far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Complaint Case No. C1-3535 of 2014, corresponding to Trial No. 5917 of 2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and further conditions that petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation and make himself available before the police as and when required and in the event of failure on his part to appear before the police on two
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7516 of 2017 (2) dt.22-02-2017 3/3 consecutive dates, the prosecution shall be free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds and further petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U