Antosh Kumar @ Antosh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26721 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2019 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== 1.

ANTOSH KUMAR @ ANTOSH KUMAR SINGH Son of Barajesh Singh @ Brijesh Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Karup, Police StationKargahar, District- Rohtas at Sasaram. 2.

BIMLA DEVI Wife of Brajesh Singh @ Brijesh Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Karup, Police Station- Kargahar, District- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Phulajhari Devi Wife of Babban Singh Resident of Village- Mowap Kala, Police Station- Imadpur, District- Bhojpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Shakil Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-03-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that during the pendency of this anticipatory bail application, the petitioner no.1 has been arrested and, as such, the same has become infructuous. He, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw this application as against petitioner no.1.

In view of the aforesaid submission, the application is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26721 of 2021(2) dt.07-03-2022 2/3 dismissed as withdrawn as having become infructuous as against petitioner no.1 Antosh Kumar @ Antosh Kumar Singh.

The petitioner no.2 Bimla Devi apprehends her arrest for the offences alleged under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, registered in connection with Complaint Case No. 495 of 2019.

As per the allegation, the marriage of the complainant's daughter was settled with Antosh Kumar @ Antosh Kumar Singh, petitioner no.1. After settlement of marriage, the accused persons demanded dowry. The allegation against the petitioner no.2, who is mother of petitioner no.1, is that she demanded 50 gms. of gold.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner no.2, who is mother of petitioner no.1, is not concerned with the dowry demand.

Considering the above facts and circumstances, let the petitioner no.2 Bimla Devi, in the event of her arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of communication of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26721 of 2021(2) dt.07-03-2022 3/3 Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case No.495 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

Office shall ensure that all the defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T