Ravi Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19691 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ravi Ranjan son of Sahjanand Sharma Village- Saguni Ps- Masaurhi DistPatna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-04-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 39/2023 dated 18.08.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420 and 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the D.P. Act.
4. As per the prosecution case, the informant's marriage was fixed with the petitioner, after that the co-accused Sahjanand demanded dowry by selling the land and threatened
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19691 of 2024(3) dt.03-04-2024 2/3 to break the marriage. Upon which the informant's father gave Rs. 15,00,000/- in cash and Rs. 3,50,000/- in the account of the co-accused person. They further demanded Rs. 12,00,000/- as a dowry. On the refusal of the same, they broke the marriage. The informant asked to return the given money, but they have not returned it and threatened her.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is so called husband of the informant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry. Learned counsel has submitted that as per the FIR, entire money was paid to the father of the petitioner on 03.09.2021, 11.01.2022 and 21.02.2022 but as per the FIR, the land was sold on 06.06.2022 much after the payment of the cash amount to the family member of the petitioner which creates doubt on the prosecution story. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19691 of 2024(3) dt.03-04-2024 3/3 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 39/2023 subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T