Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15996 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-416 Year-2020 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== 1.

Rajesh Kumar Son Of Sri Jitendra Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Susari, P.S.- Sanjhauli, District- Rohtas At Sasaram 2.

Ritesh Kumar @ Amit Kumar Son Of Sri Jitendra Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Susari, P.S.- Sanjhauli, District- Rohtas At Sasaram 3.

Manju Devi Wife Of Shri Jitendra Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Susari, P.S.- Sanjhauli, District- Rohtas At Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Priti Kumari D/O Sri Manj Kumar Singh, Wife Of Sailesh Kumar @ Basant Kumar Resident Of Village- Susari, P.S. Sanjhauli, District- Rohtas At Sasaram, At Preent Residing- Bhaluahi, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in Complaint Case No. 416 of 2020 registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Allegation against the petitioners is of committing torture

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15996 of 2022(2) dt.08-04-2022 2/3 upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are brothers-in-law whereas petitioner No. 3 is mother-in-law of the victim. The offences are triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners have 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 petitioners are named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj (Rohtas) in connection with Complaint Case No. 416 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15996 of 2022(2) dt.08-04-2022 3/3 the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The petitioners are directed to co-operate during the trial. If the petitioners do not co-operate during the trial, the court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.

(Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T