Salim Ansari @ Salim Mian v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29570 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -13 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA PS DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Salim Ansari @ Salim Mian Son of Late Ful Sharif Mian, resident of Village- Chhotaki Pakhnahiya, Police Station- Palanwa, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Fatma Khatoon D/o Late Salim Ansari, W/o Afsar Ansari, resident of Village- Bhedihari, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 10-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 30.03.2017 in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 13/16 for offences punishable under Section 498-A and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 22(1) 23(1)(iii) of the Pre-conception and Pre-Netal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that she was married in the year 2012 with one Afsar Ansari, son of the petitioner and after marriage for demand of dowry, the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29570 of 2017 (2) dt.10-07-2017 2/2 husband, mother-in-law and other members started beating the informant and also had her sex selection test when she was pregnant.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is the father-in-law of the informant-opposite party no. 2 and there is only general and omnibus allegation against him. He submits that there is no allegation of assault, demand of dowry by the petitioner and he is a man aged about 60 years. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and merely on the basis of general and omnibus allegation he has been made accused.

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that he is the father-in-law of the informant. Be that as it may, let petitioner, above named, 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 learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul, East Champaran, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 13/16. (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U T