Firoz Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32985 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== FIROZ KHAN Son of Kaiyum Khan Resident of Village - Rudalpur, P.S.- Jalalpur, District - Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Raushan Tara, D/o-Shahjada Khan, resident of village Shamshuddinpur, P.S. Rivilganj, District Saran.

... ... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Informant : Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 14-11-2019 From perusal of record, it appears that the matter has been settled between the parties before the Patna High Court Mediation Center but the informant has not been arrayed as the opposite party in this case as yet.

On the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner, he is directed to array the informant as opposite party no.2 in this case during the course of the day.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 and learned APP for the State and perused the record.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498 A & 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32985 of 2019(5) dt.14-11-2019 2/3 Dowry Prohibition Act.

Petitioner, who happens to be husband of the informant, is said to have tormented the informant over dowry demand and finally drove her out of her marital house snatching her jewelery in association of his family members. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has neither made any dowry demand nor tormented the informant nor drove her out of the house snatching her jewelery. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Parties to the case have settled their dispute before the Patna High Court Mediation Center. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also conceded the factum of settlement taken place between the parties before the Patna High Court Mediation Center. Both the parties agreed to honor the terms of settlement.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32985 of 2019(5) dt.14-11-2019 3/3 bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Chapra, Saran in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 51 of 2018, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438

(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Trivedi/- U T