Prabhu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17714 of 2020 Arising Out of Complaint Case No. 610 Year 2019 District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== 1.Prabhu Paswan s/o Late Kishori Paswan aged about 53 years (male)
2. Jitendra @ Jito Paswan s/o Prabhu Paswan aged about 35 years (male)
3. Mithun Paswan S/o Prabhu Paswan aged about 29 years (male)
4. Rikam Kumari D/o Prabhu Paswan aged about 24 years (female)
5. Rupa Devi W/o Prabhu Paswan aged about 52 years (female)
6. Sangeeta Devi W/o Jitendra PAswan @ Jito Paswan aged about 30 years (female) , all resident of village Rajopur P.S. Sheikhpura, Distt. Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/ :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Lal, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned 10-092020 APP for the State, through video conferencing. The petitioners have filed the instant application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case no. 610 of 2019 registered under sections 498A, 341, 323, 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
As per allegation in the Complaint, the complainant was married to one Sandeep Kumar, son of the petitioners no. 1 and 5 in the year 2019. It is stated that soon thereafter the accused persons started to torture the complainant for non fulfilment of demand of dowry, used to beat her up, attempted to burn her by pouring kerosene oil and also married aforesaid Sandeep Kumar
for second time.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations are false and concocted. The petitioners in the instant application are the father-in-law, mother-in-law, two brother-in-law (devar) and two sister-in-law (nanad and Gotani) of the complainant. Minor differences between the members of the family have been blown out of proportion with no document in support of the allegations made in the complaint. It is submitted that even the husband of the complainant is not absconding but has moved the learned Court below for grant of bail. Further from perusal of the impugned order rejecting the application for bail of these petitioners, it would transpire that even in course of hearing of the application in the Court below, husband of the complainant ie son of petitioner nos. 1 and 5 had appeared before the learned Court below. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, the Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Complaint
Case No. 610 of 2019 they shall be enlarged on bail on each of them on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st class, Barh, Patna subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Partha Sarthy, J) Sushma/- U T