Aamir Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62887 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -562 Year- 2018 Thana -BETTIAH CITY DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Aamir Khan, son of Nurain Khan, Resident of Village- Hardiya Chauk, Nayal Tola, Raxaul, Police Station- Raxaul, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.-7, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 562/2018, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Informant alleged that petitioner (husband) and his family members tried to kill her by sprinkling kerosene oil upon her, due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He never demanded any dowry and never tortured the informant.

Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62887 of 2018 (2) dt.12-10-2018 2/2 since 05.07.2018.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 562/2018, subject to the conditions: (1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T