Savitri Devi And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.23947 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1032 Year- 2017 Thana -BIHTA District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Savitri Devi, Wife of Late Brij Nandan Singh.
2. Guriya Devi @ Guddo Devi, Wife of Santosh Kumar.
3. Santosh Kumar, Son of Late Brij Nandan Singh. ll Resident of VillageMohanpur (Musepur), P.S.-Bihta, District-Patna.
4. Munchun Devi, Wife of Munna Singh, Resident of Village-Mahuary, P.S.-Maner, District-Patna.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Seema Kumari, Daughter of Sri Supan Singh, Resident of Village and P.O.-Nargada, P.S.-Shahpur, District-Patna.
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhay Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Rabindra Nath Tiwari, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A), 494, 120(B) of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioners tortured the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23947 of 2018 (2) dt.24-04-2018 2/3 petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The victim is in habit of instituting similar cases for similar nature of offence against the petitioners and their family members. The petitioners are in-laws of the victim. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners have 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.
On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and opposite party no. 2, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named, in the event of arrest or 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., Danapur, Patna, in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 1032/2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 3927 of 2017, subject to the conditions
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23947 of 2018 (2) dt.24-04-2018 3/3 as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T