Md. Irfan Khan @ Mohammad Irfan Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17025 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-743 Year-2017 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== MD. IRFAN KHAN @ MOHAMMAD IRFAN KHAN, aged about 29 years, Male, Son of Maksud Khan, Resident of Village-Tajpur, Police StationDildarnagar, District-Gazipur (U.P.) ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shahjada Khatun, W/o Md. Irfan Khan, D/o Mumtaj Ahmed Khan, Resident of Village- Tajpur, Police Station- Dildarnagar, District- Gazipur (U.P), Presently Village- Dandawa, Police Station- Chainpur, District- Kaimur ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

M/s Bindhyachal Singh & Vipin Kr. Singh, Advs. For the State :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP For the OP No. 2 :

Mr. Satish Kumar Giri, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 743 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Sections 498A, 406 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The accusation is of torturing of complainant/opposite party no. 2 by her husband and in-laws for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and ousting her from matrimonial house after snatching personal belongings.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that while the matter was referred before the Patna High Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17025 of 2019(5) dt.24-07-2019 2/2 Mediation Committee for mediation and settlement of dispute in between the petitioner and complainant/opposite party no. 2, who are husband and wife, but, the mediation could not succeed.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant/opposite party no. 2 submits that while opposite party no. 2 was present on each and every date before the Mediation Committee, but, petitioner has only appeared on first date, thereafter, did not turn up.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. The prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit and without being prejudiced of this order. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Shamshad/- U T