Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46141/2016rejected

Md. Qaunain Ali @ Mohammad Qaunain Ali v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-06-30Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46141 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1148 Year- 2013 Thana -EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- EASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== MD. QAUNAIN ALI @ MOHAMMAD QAUNAIN ALI, S/o Halim Miyan, R/o Vill. Batroliya, P.S. Paharpur, Dist. East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Kalma Khatoon, W/o Md. Qaunain Ali .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Qumrul Hoda For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1148C of 2013 registered under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 504/34 of the I.P.C. and 3⁄4 of the Dowry Act pending in the Court of C.J.M., East Champaran, Motihari. Submission is that petitioner, who happens to be husband, has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Further submission is that neither petitioner has demanded dowry nor assaulted the complainant.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner with submission that there is specific allegation of demand and torture in various

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46141 of 2016 (6) dt.30-06-2017 2/2 ways against the husband-petitioner and in-laws family members. Further it is submitted that mediation is also failed because husband-petitioner is rigid not to resolve the conjugal life. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) Shailendra/- U T