Gita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26304 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2019 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

GITA DEVI W/O CHARITAR RAM RESIDENT AT MOHALLAMARANPUR- CHAMARTOLI, MARANPUR-ROAD, P.S.- VISHNUPAD (GAYA) DISTRICT-GAYA PIN-823001 2.

CHARITRA RAM SON OF LATE RAMKHELAWAN RAM RESIDENT AT MOHALLA- MARANPUR- CHAMARTOLI, MARANPUR-ROAD, P.S.- VISHNUPAD (GAYA) DISTRICT-GAYA PIN-823001 3.

TARUN KUMAR SON OF CHARITAR RAM RESIDENT AT MOHALLA- MARANPUR- CHAMARTOLI, MARANPUR-ROAD, P.S.- VISHNUPAD (GAYA) DISTRICT-GAYA PIN-823001 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 27-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defect(s) as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 379 and 354/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It is a case of demand of dowry and in the condition of non-fulfilment of the same, she was subjected to mentally and physically torture in the different ways by the accused persons.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26304 of 2021(2) dt.27-01-2022 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent. He further submits that the petitioner no.1 is mother-in-law, petitioner no.2 is father-in-law and petitioner no.3 is Dewar of the victim lady. He further submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory 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 CJM, Gaya in connection with Vishnupad (Gaya) P.S. Case No. 246 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) brajesh kumar/- U T