Amit Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38258 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -327 Year- 2015 Thana -SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSAMASTIPUR ====================================================== Amit Kumar S/o Abhay Kumar @ Ghuran Mahto Resident of VillageSimari, P.S.- Bidyapati Nagar, District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Kumari Kanchan Mala W/o Amit Kumar, D/o Sudhir Kumar Nirala residing at Village Damodarpur, Post- Surauli, P.S.- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Onkar Nath For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.P.P. for the State as also the learned counsel for the complainant.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 327 of 2015 for the offences punishable under section 498 (A) of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complainant was married to the petitioner on 14.06.2015 and thereafter the petitioner and other in-laws started torturing and assaulting her for non fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of motorcycle and freeze and ultimately ousted her after assaulting her on 05.07.2015 after snatching all her articles

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38258 of 2016 (9) dt.28-06-2017 2/2 and ornaments.

Submission is of false implication and that nothing has been demanded by the petitioner or any one, the petitioner is a law abiding citizen, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, as a matter of fact the complainant is not medically fit for the conjugal life and after concealing this fact marriage was solemnized and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. duly assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by submitting that now there is medical report that the complainant is medically fit and therefore with wrong allegation the petitioner is making defence and as such the petitioner, being husband, does not deserve pre-arrest bail. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of S.D.J.M. Dalsingsarai, District- Samastipur.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T