Md. Rafique Akhtar @ Shahid Rafique Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16123 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2017 Thana- GAYA KOTWALI District- Gaya ====================================================== Md. Rafique Akhtar @ Shahid Rafique Akhtar aged about 28 years Son Of Md. Shamim @ Shamim Anwar Resident Of Village - Purab Sarai, Near Chhoti Masjid, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Gaya ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Anjum Ara @ Guriya aged about 25 years Wife Of Md. Rafique Akhtar @ Shahid Rafique Akhtar And D/O- Ibrar Ahmad Khan Resident Of Village - Bakey Gali Panchayatiya Akhara, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Narain Sinha, Advocate Mr. UK Singh, Advocate For the opposite party :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, Advocate Mr. Ajay Kr.Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and opposite party no.2.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and his family members subjected the informant to cruelty and harassment due to non-fulfilment of dowry demand and ousted her from matrimonial house.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16123 of 2020(7) dt.02-03-2021 2/2 ready to keep opposite party no.2 with dignity and safety. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that by order dated 27.11.2019, passed by the learned Family Court, Gaya in Misc.Case No. 46 of 2017, the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance @ Rs.8000/- per month to opposite party no.2 and her children but petitioner has not paid anything by way of maintenance to them.

In view of the conduct of the petitioner, his prayer for bail is refused with direction to surrender and seek regular bail which would be considered and disposed of on its own merit without prejudice.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T