Jitendra Pandey v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.15345 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -611 Year- 2013 Thana -JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE DistrictJEHANABAD ====================================================== Jitendra Pandey, S/o Bhuneshwar Pandey, Resident of Village- Rampur Saraiya, P.S.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Suman Devi, W/o Jitendra Pandey, Resident of Village- Rampur, P.S.- Shakurabad, District- Jehanabad, D/o Girjashankar Vajpayee, Resident of Village- Akhtar Gor, P.S.- Vairgania, District- Sitamarhi, at present address Village- Paleya More Makhdumpur, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rama Kant Singh, Advocate. For the State : Smt. Suman Kumari Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A) of the IPC and 4 of the D.P. Act.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15345 of 2018 (2) dt.16-03-2018 2/2 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 counsel for the State, 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. Jehanabad, in connection with Complaint Case No. 611/2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T