Aslam Rizvi @ Md. Aslam Mansoori v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22161 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2013 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== ASLAM RIZVI @ MD. ASLAM MANSOORI Son of Sayed Ahmad @ Sudha, Resident of Village-Mauna Taraon, P.O-Taraon, P.S-Nasriganj, District-Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Tabasum Paraveen Wife of Aslam Rizvi, D/o Md. Jahruddin, Resident of Mohalla-Nilkothi, Dehri, P.O and P.S-Dehri, District-Rohtas. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-12-2021 Nobody appears on behalf of O. P. No.2.

On the earlier occasion, by order dated 17.11.2021 it was made clear that no adjournment would be granted to the parties on the next date and the matter would be disposed of on the material available on record.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 323, 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the complainant was married with this petitioner on 01.04.2011 and thereafter it is alleged that all the accused persons started torturing her for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22161 of 2019(12) dt.01-12-2021 2/3 dowry, assaulted her and ousted her from her matrimonial house.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner never tortured the complainant and allegations leveled against him are false and concocted. As a matter of fact, the complainant deserted the petitioner and is living with her parents at her Naihar. It is further submitted that since there was no scope of reconciliation, both the parties prayed for divorce with mutual consent before Hizari and their prayer was allowed by Hizari Falau Dawaren, Dehri with their consent and she received the entire amount decided by Hizari and the complainant has filed this false case with a view to blackmail the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today 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 Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Complaint case No. 137/2013,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22161 of 2019(12) dt.01-12-2021 3/3 subject to conditions laid down u/s 438(2) of the Cr. P. C. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T