Biranjan Ram v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11742 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2443 Year-2016 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Biranjan Ram son of Yogendra Ram, resident of village Shihpur, P.S. Mahua, District Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. State Of Bihar

2. Sarita Devi wife of Biranjan Ram, resident of village Sahpur, P.O. Kanhauli, P.S. Mahua, District Vaishali, presently D/o Ramesh Ram, village Madhopur, P.O. Mirjanagar, P.S. Mahua, District Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State :

Smt. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 498A, 406, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, but cognizance has been taken under Sections 498A/34 of the I.P.C. and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of 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 tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11742 of 2018(2) dt.05-03-2018 2/2 petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has 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. On behalf of the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case.

A joint prayer has been made on behalf of the parties that the parties are ready to reside together with all respect and dignity.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Hajipur at Vaishali in connection with Complaint case No.2443 of 2016, Tr. No.3307 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Narendra/- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T