Rajeev Mishra @ Ranjeet Mishra @ Rajeev Kumar Mishra @ Ranjeet Miya @ Sanjeev Mishra v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.42778 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -813 Year- 2016 Thana -GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGOPALGANJ ====================================================== RAJEEV MISHRA @ RANJEET MISHRA @ RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA @ RANJEET MIYA @ SANJEEV MISHRA S/o- Sri Ram Prasad Mishra @ Shabha Mishra, Resident of Village- Chhatarpatti, P.O.- Bodh Chhapar, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Gopalganj. At present residing at Gandak Colony, Station Road, Gopalganj, P.S.- Gopalganj Town, DistrictGopalganj. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sati Mishra @ Swaritika, D/o- Gorakh Mishra, W/o- Rajeev Mishra @ Rajeev Kumar Mishra @ Ranjeet Mishra, Resident of Village- Chhatarpatti, P.O.- Bodh Chhapar, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Gopalganj. At present residing at Village- Kotanarahvan, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Gopalganj. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Nirmala Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Trial No.1894/2017, arising out of Complaint bearing Registration No.813/2016 for the offence instituted under Sections 498A, 496, 406, 284, 420 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42778 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The case is triable by the Magistrate. Due to petty family dispute, the present case has been instituted against the petitioner. The petitioner has 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 petitioner is named in the Complaint Case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Trial No.1894/2017, arising out of Complaint bearing Registration No.813/2016 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.-XI, Gopalganj, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Sudhir Singh, J) Amit/- U T