Mahendra Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38043 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1086 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.
MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH son of Jagdish Singh Village Po- Mugaon Ps- Korani Dist- Buxar 2.
Vinay Kumar son of Mahendra Pratap Singh Village Po- Mugaon Ps- Korani Dist- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Bihar 2.
Pintu Kumar Singh son of Late Rajeshwar Singh Village- Vishnupura PsBihta Dist- patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Complaint Case No. 1086(c)/ 2018 dated 29.08.2018 registered for the offences punishable u/s 406 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 4 of the D.P. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the Complainant alleged that the marriage of his niece was managed in the month of June, 2018 and date of Tilak was fixed on 24.02.2019 while the date of marriage was fixed on 02.03.2019. During this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38043 of 2023(5) dt.09-01-2024 2/3 period, the Complainant had given 8 lakh rupees as gift. It is alleged that on 31.02.2018, a demand of Car was made by the accused persons which was denied by him ultimately the arrangement was dissolved on 23.08.2018.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners never demanded any dowry from the Complainant and there is no proof of such money given to the petitioners either by way of cheque or draft. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioners, let the above named petitioner, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Danapur in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38043 of 2023(5) dt.09-01-2024 3/3 connection with Complaint Case No. 1086(c)/ 2018, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T