Raushan Kumar @ Raushan v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21386 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA THANA District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Raushan Kumar @ Raushan, Son of Sri Raja Ram Singh, resident of Mohalla New Colony, Etaba, Kutumb Nagar, P.S.- Mufassil, Singdhoul, O.P. District- Begusarai, Presently posted as Caption, 28, Rajput Regiment , Firozpur Cant, Punjab.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mithi Kumari @ Mithi Singh, daughter of Sri Umesh Prasad Singh, resident of Village Mangraudib, P.S. Mufassil, District Giridih, Jharkhand.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-05-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, informant and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Begusarai Mahila P.S. Case No. 03 of 2017, G.R. No. 443 of 2017 for the offences instituted under Sections 498(A), 323, 341 of the IPC and 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the petitioner subjected the complainant/wife namely, Mithi Kumari, to cruelty and torture both mentally and physically due to non-fulfilment of dowry demand of Rs. 20,00,000/- and ultimately she was ousted from her matrimonial home by the accused persons including the petitioner.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21386 of 2017 (2) dt.23-05-2017 2/2 petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. No specific allegation has been made against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and the informant, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he is the husband of the informant. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with G.R. No. 443/2017, arising out of Begusarai Mahila P.S. Case No. 03/2017 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Begusarai, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T