Binod Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.52002 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -354 Year- 2013 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Binod Kumar son of Shesh Nath Tiwary, resident of village- Jalalpur, P.S. Lalganj, District- Vaishali .... .... Petitioner.
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Meera Kumari wife of Sri Binodanand Jha, resident of village- Harpur Osti, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali, presently resides at Mohalla- Gandhi Chowk, Mahua Bazar, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manish Kumar-Ii(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 17-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Trial No. 2991 of 2013 arising out of Complaint case no. 354 of 2013, for the offences alleged under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The complainant alleged that the marriage of her daughter Palawi Kumari @ Gunja Kumar was settled with Binod Kumar (petitioner herein). The Tilak ceremony was performed in which articles like, gold ring, gold chain, clothes worth Rs.40,000/- along with cash of Rs.11,000/- and other gifts were given to the petitioner and Rs.25,000/- was given to Shesh Nath Tiwary, father
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52002 of 2015 (2) dt.17-12-2015 2/3 of the petitioner. A week before the marriage, the petitioner along with other accused started demanding Hero Honda Passion motorcycle as dowry and told that if the demand is not fulfilled, the marriage would not be performed. The complainant refused to fulfill the demand and went to the house of the accused persons for return of all gifted articles, but the petitioner and other accused persons refused to return the same.
It has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that neither the complainant has ever come to the house of the petitioner nor any photograph of the engagement ceremony has been filed in the Court. It has further been submitted that the Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted the privilege of anticipatory bail to other co-accused persons in Cr. Misc. No. 31098 of 2015 dated 30.07.2015, for the same and similar allegation, as the allegation being general against all the accused persons.
Under such circumstances, I do not propose to take a different view and let the above-named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52002 of 2015 (2) dt.17-12-2015 3/3 each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali, in connection with Trial No. 2991 of 2013 arising out of Complaint case no. 354 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. (Nilu Agrawal, J) kunal/- U T