Vishwanath Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22829 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2021 Thana- SISWAN District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

VISHWANATH MANJHI S/o Lalmohar Manjhi Resident of VillageMasudaha, Police Station- Ander, District- Siwan 2.

Rajesh Manjhi S/o Lalmohar Manjhi Resident of Village- Masudaha, Police Station- Ander, District- Siwan 3.

Monu Manjhi S/o Lalmohar Manjhi Resident of Village- Masudaha, Police Station- Ander, District- Siwan 4.

Lalmohar Manjhi S/o Late Ragru Manjhi @ Pagru Manjhi Resident of Village- Masudaha, Police Station- Ander, District- Siwan 5.

Bhagwati Devi W/o Lal Mohar Manjhi Resident of Village- Masudaha, Police Station- Ander, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 498(A) & other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

As per the prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused including these petitioners committed torture and harassment to informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

Petitioners no. 1, 2 & 3 are Devar, petitioners no. 4 & 5 are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22829 of 2022(2) dt.06-09-2022 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that thrust of the accusation is against Sonu Kumar Manjhi, who is husband of the informant. So far as these petitioners are concerned, they are separate in mess and property and have got no concern with the family affairs of informant and her husband. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners.

However, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Siwan in connection with Siswan (Chainpur OP) P.S. Case No. 249 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T