Triloki Prasad @ Triloki Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20404 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -10 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA PS DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Triloki Prasad @ Triloki Kumar, Son of Ganesh Sah, Resident of Village - Kolhuarwa, P.S. - Motihari Town, District - East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Pinki Kumari, Wife of Triloki Prasad @ Triloki Kumar, D/O Jhagaru Prasad, resident of Village - Lakhaura Barwa, P.S. - Lakhaurwa, District - East Champaran.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kumar Sharan, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Ram Priya Saran Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-07-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mahila P.S. Case No. 10 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The first wife of the petitioner alleged that she was married to the petitioner on 28.01.2016 and went to her Sasural but immediately thereafter the petitioner and his family members started subjecting her to all sorts of torture. The informant alleged that her husband is of bad character. He took her to Nepal and confined her in a room and made an attempt to kill her. She again went to her Sasural but the behaviour of her husband did not

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20404 of 2017 (3) dt.12-07-2017 2/2 change. Her husband solemnized second marriage with Puja Devi and brought her to the house. The informant further alleged that on 05.02.2017 all the accused persons brutally assaulted her. They snatched her certificates and her belongings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation is false and concocted. The informant does not want to live with her husband but, learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner has already solemnized second marriage with Puja Devi within a span of one year and there is allegation that the petitioner subjected her to all sorts of torture. Considering the facts aforesaid I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T