Shiv Pukar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30063 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Shiv Pukar Pandey Son of Bachcha Jee Pandey Resident of village - Delhuaa, P.O.- Kharari, P.S.- Karaghar, District - Rohtas (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Priti Kumari Wife of Shiv Pukar Pandey D/o Gopal Pandey, Village - Tenduni, P.S.- Karaghar, District - Rohtas (Bihar). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dineshwar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 186 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. According to the complaint, the complainant was married to the petitioner and marriage certificate was issued by the Marriage Officer, Rohtas. As per allegation, the petitioner and his family members tortured the victim for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry of a Maruti Alto Car.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30063 of 2025(4) dt.07-10-2025 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The alleged victim did not disclose the factum of her earlier marriage and keeping in dark, she solemnized her second marriage with the petitioner for which the petitioner has already filed a case for declaring the marriage as null and void under Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. That matrimonial case no. 255 of 2021 was filed in the year 2021 and in retaliation thereof, the present case has been filed.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Complaint Case No. 186 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T