Maheshwar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18723 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-649 Year-2017 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad ====================================================== MAHESHWAR PASWAN Son of Shyam Narayan Paswan Resident of - Hajipur, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Aurangabad, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Rajmuni Devi Wife of Maheshwar Paswan, D/O- Ramnandan Paswan Resident of -Hajipur, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Aurangabad, Bihar, Presently residing at Village - Ratanpura, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Aurangabad, Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Purushotam Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.649 of 2017/Trial No.1708 of 2018 registered under Sections 498(A), 379, 307, 323 and 341/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that after the marriage, while the opposite party no.2 was kept properly for four months at the matrimonial house but, thereafter, she was being tortured by her husband (petitioner) and the petitioner used to make demand of motorcycle and gold chain in dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the same, he used to cause assault to the opposite party no.2. Ultimately,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18723 of 2019(5) dt.15-07-2019 2/2 the father of the opposite party no.2 took the opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house to his house. The opposite party no.2 alleged that she was subjected to torture by her husband (petitioner) and other in-laws for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, due to misunderstanding the opposite party no.2 has lodged the present complaint case. The petitioner is still ready to keep the opposite party no.2 with full honour and dignity. In spite of service of notice, the opposite party no.2 did not appear before this Court.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender by him within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Complaint Case No.649 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T