Tinku Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29630 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Jamui ====================================================== TINKU RAM Son of Bharat Ram Resident of Village- Suggi, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 08-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 498(A), 379/34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P.Act registered in connection with Jamui Mahila P.S. Case No. 72 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the allegation of demand for dowry and torture are highly improbable considering that the petitioner and the informant have been married for about 13 years and have three children from the wedlock. The petitioner expresses his readiness to keep the informant with due dignity and honour and no complaint of this nature has ever been made in the past. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Jamui, in connection with Jamui Mahila P.S. Case No. 72 of 2018 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and also subject to the following further conditions:

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29630 of 2019(2) dt.08-05-2019 2/2 i. That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner. ii. That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

iii. That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iv. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T