Md. Shubhan @ Md Subhan @ Tanwir v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28372 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2023 Thana- MADHEPURA COMPALINT CASE District- Madhepura ====================================================== Md. Shubhan @ Md Subhan @ Tanwir S/O Md Nasim @ Md Nasim Khan R/O Kabutari Gali, Alamgunj Ward No. 7, Patna, P.S- Alamgunj, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Kaynat Praveen W/O Md Shubhan @ Tanveer R/O Rahmangunj Ward No. 13, P.- Madhepura, Distt.- Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Swapnil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complainant Case No. 38/2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 4 of the D.P. Act and Section 4 of the Muslim Women ( protection of right on marriage) Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28372 of 2024(2) dt.20-05-2024 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is husband of the complainant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the complainant. The petitioner has 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." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28372 of 2024(2) dt.20-05-2024 3/3 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Madhepura in connection with Complainant Case No. 38/2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with further condition:- (i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.

7. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconcilation or one time settlement.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T