Madan Chaurasia And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41981 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -698 Year- 2015 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Madan Chaurasia Son of Late Basudeo Chourasia

2. Rahul Chourasia Son of Madan Chourasia

3. Ranjan Chourasia Son of Madan Chourasia All are the residents of Village - Dinara, Police Station - Dinara, District - Rohtas. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Poonam Devi Wife of Bipin Chourasia, D/o Ganesh Chourasia Resident of Village & Post & P.S. Natwar, District - Rohtas. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Anita Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with complaint case no. 698 of 2015 for the offences instituted under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of D.P. Act.

The allegation against the petitioners is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41981 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner no.1 is father-inlaw of the complainant, petitioner no.2 is Bhaisur of the complainant and petitioner no.3 is Devar of the complainant. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. The petitioners have further relied upon the judgment of this court, in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with complaint case no. 698 of 2015 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Bikramganj, Rohtas, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Amit/- U T