Most. Rabeya Khatoon And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.63191 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -282 Year- 2016 Thana -GHORASAHAN DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Most. Rabeya Khatoon, Wife of Late Mansur Mian,
2. Saddam Mian @ Saddam, Son of Late Mansur Mian,
3. Hasnain Mian @ Hasnain, Son of Late Mansur Mian,
4. Parvej Mian @ Parvej, Son of Late Mansur Mian,
5. Jikaril Mian @ Jikarullah, son o fLate Kamruzama Mian,
6. Antul Khatooon @ Hasina Khatoon, wife of Jikari Mian, All resident of Village- Ratanmala, Police Station- Bagaha, District- West Champaran.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Zainul Abedin, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. S. Ehteshamuddin, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A), 494,307 and 313 of the IPC.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioners tortured the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63191 of 2017 (2) dt.04-01-2018 2/3 There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner nos. 1 to 4 are in-laws of the victim and petitioner nos. 5-6 are not family members of the victim. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. No offences under Sections 307 and 313 of the IPC were made out as there is no medical evidence to support the allegations made in the F.I.R. 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 counsel for the State, 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 S.D.J.M. Sikarahana Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Ghorasahan (Lakhaura) P.S. Case No. 282 of 2016, subject to the conditions as
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63191 of 2017 (2) dt.04-01-2018 3/3 laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T