Basuki Nath Rai v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29372 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -691 Year- 2016 Thana -COMPLAINT CASE District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Basuki Nath Rai, Son of Ramji Rai, Resident of Village- Neba Lal Chauk, P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnia.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Khushbu Kumari, W/o Basukinath Rai, Daughter Dilip Kumar Rai, Resident of Village- Omnagar, P.S. & District- Araria. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Samir Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Arun, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-10-2017 On earlier occasion i.e., 13.09.2017, the parties had mutually agreed to stay together but today it has been submitted that despite best efforts, it is not possible for the parties to stay together.

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. 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29372 of 2017 (4) dt.13-10-2017 2/2 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 C.J.M. Araria, in connection with Complaint Case No. 691 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