Sudhir Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23447 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-364 Year-2017 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sudhir Kumar Das Son of Nandipat Das@ Nandipati Das Resident of VillageBhahama, P.S. Pupri, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. The same is kept on record. In view of the supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraph 3 of the main application in course of the day.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 379, 498(A), 504, 506, 494, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23447 of 2018(2) dt.24-04-2018 2/2 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 28.12.2017. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the present case. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/complaint case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 364 of 2017. (Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T