Ram Bilash Chaudhary And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16705 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3574 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Ram Bilash Chaudhary aged about 65 years (Male) Son of Late Ram Bahadur Chaudhary Resident of 4H/6, Bahadurpur, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna 2.

Manju Devi aged about 61 years (Female) Wife of Ram Bilash Chaudhary Resident of 4H/6, Bahadurpur, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna 3.

Resmi Kumari @ Rimpi aged about 40 years (Female) Wife of Alok Kumar Resident of 4H/6, Bahadurpur, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna 4.

Gaurav Swaroop aged about 32 years (Male) Son of Ram Bilash Chaudhary Resident of 4H/6, Bahadurpur, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna 5.

Ajay Kumar Chaudhary @ Ajay Kumar aged about 58 years (Male) Son of Jawahar Chaudhary Resident of HIG, Housing Colony, Bhootnath Road, P.S.- Agamkuan, District- Patna 6.

Vijay Chaudhary aged about 56 years (Male) Son of Jawahar Chaudhary Resident of HIG, Housing Colony, Bhootnath Road, P.S.- Agamkuan, District- Patna 7.

Tuddu @ Anita @ Ankita Acharya aged about 19 years (female) D/o Vijay Chaudhary R/o Mohalla- HIG, Housing Colony, Bhootnath Road, P.S.- Agamkuan, District- Patna ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Pallavi Kumari aged about 37 years (female) Wife of Anand Swaroop, D/o Ram Sagar Mandal Resident of 4H/6, Bahadurpur, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna, presently residing at E/93, P.C. Colony, Malahi Pakri, P.S.- Kankarbagh, Distt.- Patna ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mahendra Thakur, Advocate For the Complainant :

Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 28-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16705 of 2019(2) dt.28-03-2019 2/3 The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 3574(C)/2018 registered under Sections 498(A), 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the son of petitioner no. 1 & 2 is married to opposite party no. 2. Both of them are divorcee and had gone for this marriage on their own will. It is submitted that at this stage complaint petition has been filed on totally false and flimsy allegations which would be apparent from the fact that the complainant has herself stated that she does not know the correct name of her inlaws petitioner nos. 1 & 2 who are father-in-law and mother-inlaw respectively, petitioner no. 3 is married Nanad, petitioner no. 4 is Dewar, petitioner no. 5 & 6 are Mamiya Sasur (maternal uncle-in-law) and petitoner no. 7 is Mameri Nanad of the complainant. It is submitted that the entire family members who are related to the husband of opposite party no. 2 have been made accused in the present case.

Learned counsel representing the complainant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail as according to him all these petitioners have at some point of time played some role in causing mental agony to the complainant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16705 of 2019(2) dt.28-03-2019 3/3 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the relationship of the petitioners with that of opposite party no. 2 and the submissions that there are general and omnibus allegations only to harass the entire family members of the husband, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, let the above-named petitioners be enlarged on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No. 3574(C) of 2018, subject to condition prescribed under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T