Arjun Kumar Lal @ Arjun Lal And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1823 of 2017 (2) dt.19-01-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.1823 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2016 Thana -GAYA KOTWALI District- GAYA ======================================================
1. Arjun Kumar Lal @ Arjun Lal
2. Usha Kumari, D/o- Arjun Kumar Lal @ Arjun Lal
3. Shankar Prasad Agrawal
4. Ramjee Prasad Agrawal
5. Shravan Agrawal @ Sharwan Kumar Agarwal All sons of Arjun Kumar Lal @ Arjun Lal, R/o- Mohalla- New Godwon, Bhusandi More, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Chandra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Kanhaiya Kishore ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 212 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A) and 316 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3.
Accusation is of assault on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. It is also alleged that the accused persons attempted to kill the informant by sprinkling Kerosene oil and also aborted the child.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that these petitioners are in-laws of the informant such as father-in-law, nanad and devars and they have no concern with the alleged occurrence. In the year 2015, the informant was married with Shambhu
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1823 of 2017 (2) dt.19-01-2017 Kumar Agarwal. In fact, earlier the informant was married with one Badal Kumar from whom there is a child, who is aged about 7 years. On account of this fact, the entire dispute arose and the husband of the informant filed a Matrimonial Suit No. 38 of 2016 against the informant, which is still pending and in consequence thereof, this case has been lodged by the informant only to harass the petitioners. The entire case appears to be a counterblast of the aforesaid Matrimonial case, which was filed the husband of the informant. There is no role of these petitioners in any manner. Hence, they deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation made against these present petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 (Ten Thousand rupees only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Gaya in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 212 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Arvind Srivastava, J) Brajesh/- U T