Sikandar Ram @ Sikandar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28081 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2020 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== SIKANDAR RAM @ SIKANDAR KUMAR Son of Ramdeo Ram Resident of village - Shri Rampur, P.S. - Parsa, District - Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate.

For the Informant : Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Parsa P.S. Case No. 223/2020 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is the husband of the informant and he in association of his family members tortured the informant on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and lastly ousted her from matrimonial home.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28081 of 2021(2) dt.04-01-2022 2/2 falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is ready to keep his wife with full honour and dignity. The petitioner went to his Sasural to bring his wife where he was brutally assaulted by the parents and brother of the informant for which he has filed a complaint petition. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is serious in nature and he has also solemnized the second marriage, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T