Ravi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26386 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2020 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali ====================================================== RAVI KUMAR, S/O Kaleshwar Sah @ Munna Sah R/O Village - Pojhiyan, P.S. - Lalganj, District - Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Punam Kumari, W/O - Ravi Kumar, D/O- Umesh Sah, R/O Village - Badauli, P.O. and P.S. - Lalganj, District - Vaishali. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Paswan, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :

Mrs. Bela Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2021 Heard Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Paswan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Bela Singh, learned counsel for the informant (opposite Party No.2) and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Lalganj Police Station Case No. 30 of 2020, disclosing offences under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506 and 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The allegation, as per the First Information Report is that the marriage of the informant was solemnized with the petitioner on 29.05.2019. It has further been alleged that after

2/4 some time, the petitioner and other accused persons started demanding of Rs. 2 lakh as dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the demand, the petitioner tortured the informant, mentally as well as physically and ousted her from her matrimonial home. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and the allegation against him is false and concocted and the same is general and omnibus in nature. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner, petitioner is ready to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- to the informant-Opposite Party No.2, subject to the final outcome of the matrimonial and/or maintenance case filed or decided between the parties. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.

2-informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that within five months of the marriage, petitioner started demanding dowry and due to nonfulfillment of the demand, he tortured the informant physically as well as mentally. However, the offer made by the petitioner is acceptable to the informant-Opposite Party No.2, subject to the final outcome of the matrimonial and/or maintenance case, if any.

3/4 Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the offer made by the petitioner is acceptable to the informant-Opposite Party No.2, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail, subject to the condition that the petitioner will deposit a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month in the bank account of the informant-Opposite Party No.2, the number of which shall be furnished by learned counsel for the informant-Opposite Party No.2 to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner within a period of two weeks. Amount of Rs.2,500/- shall be deposited in each and every month by the petitioner in the account of Opposite Party No.2 starting from 10th February, 2021 and it is made clear that the amount shall be deposited by 10th day of every month in the account of the Opposite Party No.2 by the petitioner.

This application is, accordingly, allowed.

Let the petitioner, Ravi Kumar, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Lalganj Police Station Case No. 30 of 2020,

4/4 subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also subject to the aforesaid condition made hereinabove.

It is made clear that the amount so paid by the petitioner to the Opposite Party No.2 shall be subject to the final outcome of matrimonial and/or maintenance case filed or decided between the parties.

It goes without saying that in case of noncompliance of the condition by the petitioner, the informantOpposite Party No.2 shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail.

It is made clear at the time of furnishing bail bond, all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T