Santosh Sahni v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24422 of 2017 (5) dt.30-10-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24422 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -187 Year- 2014 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Santosh Sahni, Son of Surendra Sahni, Resident of Village- Dakrama, P.S.- Hathauri, District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Chandra Kishore Sahni, Son of Ram Sharan Sahni, Resident of VillageMatalpur, P.S.- Pear, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Amrendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 187 of 2014 registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The accusation is that complainant-opposite party no. 2 settled the marriage of his daughter with the petitioner and gave cash and articles. But at the time of performing the marriage in temple, this petitioner made demand of motorcycle while anyhow the matter was pacified and the marriage of daughter of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24422 of 2017 (5) dt.30-10-2017 complainant-opposite party no.2 was performed with the petitioner. But later on, petitioner did not turn up for "Bidai" of daughter of informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, marriage of the petitioner is not performed with the daughter of the informant rather complainant-opposite party no. 2 approached to parents of the petitioner to perform the marriage of his daughter with the petitioner but marriage could not be settled. Due to that reason with ulterior motive the present case has been lodged with false allegation by the complainant-opposite party no. 2. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner 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, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, East Muzaffarpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 187 of 2014, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T