Ayodhya Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36812 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1885 Year-2023 Thana- GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Ayodhya Prasad Son Of Late Moti Lal Prasad Resident Of Village - Salempur, P.S. - Sidhwaliya, District - Gopalganj, Bihar, At Present Residing At 59, Khirni Fatak, Tara Nagar, P.S. - Jhotwara, District - Jaipur (WEST) Rajasthan ... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
Bindu Devi Wife Of Brij Mohan Singh Resident Of Village And Post - Gausiya, P.S. - Manjhagarh, District - Gopalganj ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shantanu Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3⁄4 D.P. Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that in sum and substance, the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is that the marriage of the daughter of the informant was fixed with the son of the petitioner but the same could not materialise as the son of the petitioner after getting appointed with the railway started demanding dowry. The learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36812 of 2024(2) dt.27-06-2024 2/2 submits that the son of the petitioner had qualified for the railway in the year 2019 itself, as such, at the time when marriage was fixed, the informant and his side were aware that the son the petitioner has qualified for being appointed in the railway. It is submitted that some dispute arose in between the would be groom and the bride and as such the marriage was called off.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No.1885/2023. Tr. No.2186/2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T