Milan Kumar Premi v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23251 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -570 Year- 2016 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Milan Kumar Premi, S/o Girdhari Prasad Sah, Resident of Village - Nargi Jagdish, P.S. - Saraiya, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Khushboo Kumari W/o Milan Kumar Premi, D/o Arun Kumar Sah Resident of Village - Nargi Jagdish, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur at present resident of Village Srirampur, P.S. Sirsiya Jagdish, District - Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Anil Kumar Dwivedi, Priyanka Kumari and Prashansa Jaiswal, Advocates.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-10-2017 The matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation Centre, Patna, for mediation vide order dated 08.06.2017 but the mediation failed as per the report of the Mediator.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Section 498(A) of the IPC.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23251 of 2017 (4) dt.13-10-2017 2/3 The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the 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 due to petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has further relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and opposite party no. 2, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M. (West), Muzaffarpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 570 of 2016,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23251 of 2017 (4) dt.13-10-2017 3/3 Trial No. 4316 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T