Vineet Singh @ Vineet Kumar Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43746 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA P.S DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Vineet Singh @ Vineet Kumar Singh Son of Chandrawansh Narayan Singh Resident of Village-Kundilpur Bargajwa and Ward No. 16, Narkatiaganj, Police Station-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran at Bettiah At Present resident of 19D, Flat No. 131, Shivkala Apartment, Sector-51, Police Station-Sector-49, District-Gautambudhnagar,NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Akanksha Kumari Wife of Vinit Singh, Resident of Village-Kundilpur Bargajwa and Ward No. 16,Narkatiaganj, Police Station-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran at Bettiah Daughter of Shivshankar Singh,Resident of Village-Suarchhap Pipra, Police Station-Lauriya, District-West Champaran at Bettiah At Present resident of MohallaDevnagar, Police Station-Bettiah (Moffasil) District-West Champaran at Bettiah.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, informant and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 06/2017 for the offences instituted under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 379/34 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D. P. Act.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the informant due to non-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43746 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 fulfillment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. He 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. It has been submitted by learned counsels for the State and the informant that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on 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 Mahila P.S. Case No. 06/2017 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. Ist Class, West Champaran at Bettiah, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T