Mohd. Tanweer Imam @ Md. Tanweer Imam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22007 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3226 Year-2020 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Mohd. Tanweer Imam @ Md. Tanweer Imam, S/o Mohd. Eqbal Imam, Resident of Near Saraswati Shishu Mandir School, Shadipur Road, Kaura, Maidan, P.S. Munger, District - Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Saima Nazneen, D/o Mohammad Shoeb Arsalan R/o Flat No. 104, Ahmad Enclave Apartment, Ali Nagar Colony, Anisabad, P.S. - Gardanibagh, District- Patna, Bihar.
Presently residing at BD/4, Apana Ghar Apartment, Tiwari Street, Main Road, P.S - Hindpiri, District - Ranchi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shadab Akhter, Advocate Mr. Homa Yunus, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP Mr. Jainandra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Roy, Advocate Ms. Shivangi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 04-04-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Complaint Case no. 3226 of 2020 registered under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant was married to the petitioner in the year 2019. The complainant states that she was tortured by the accused persons including the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22007 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/3 petitioner herein who happens to be her husband and who was regularly pressurising her to convince her father to pay the bank EMIs for the loan taken by him for his house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. After inquiry, by order dated 23.3.2023 cognizance was taken only under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is in custody since 23.11.2023 and has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that not only the petitioner is named in the FIR but there is substantial material against him that he along with other accused persons continuously tortured the complainant for the demands, details of which has been mentioned in the complaint.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the contents of the complaint petition, the material that has transpired in course of inquiry, cognizance having been taken only under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner having remained in custody since 23.11.2023, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Complaint Case no. 3226 of 2020, on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22007 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class-cum-A.M. XIV, Patna. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T