Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Kumar Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35120 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2021 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Kumar Tiwari S/o Akhilesh Tiwari R/o villageBoliya, P.S.- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Priyanka Devi W/o Arvind Kumar Tiwari, D/o Janeshwar Mishra R/o village- Tiyara Kala, P.S.- Chutiya, District- Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-08-2023 Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party No. 2.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. As per prosecution case, all the FIR named accused persons including this petitioner tortured and harassed the informant for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

5. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner happens to be husband of the informant and present case has been lodged due to petty family dispute. There is general and omnibus allegation of commission of assault against him. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35120 of 2022(4) dt.04-08-2023 2/2 further submitted that petitioner is ready to keep the informant, as his wife, with full honour and dignity. It is next submitted that the case is triable by the Magistrate. In this connection, petitioner has relied upon a 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.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Dehri on Sone, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 58 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T