Mithlesh Mandal @ Mithun v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3022 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -393 Year- 2016 Thana -BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictBHAGALPUR ====================================================== Mithlesh Mandal @ Mithun, Son of Uchit Mandal, Resident of VillageGyanidas Tola Tintanga Diyara, Police Station- Gopalpur (Rangara), District- Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitionet

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sunita Devi, Wife of Mithlesh Mandal, Daughter of Rambilash Mandal, Resident of Village- Rangra, P.S.- Gopalpur (Rangra), DistrictBhagalpur. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Dashrath Mehta, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A), 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 498(A) of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3022 of 2018 (2) dt.18-01-2018 2/2 petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner has 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, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M. Naugachia, Bhagalpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. C-393 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T