Mahendra Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39344 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2012 Thana- SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mahendra Sahni Son of Ram Chandra Sahni Resident of Village- Rewasi Pakri, P.S. -Riga, Dist. Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Vaso Devi @ Vasundari Devi Wife of Mahendra Sahni and Daughter of Late Ram Kewal Sahni Resident of Village- Sirisya Bazar, P.S- Bela, DistSitamarhi , At Present Wife of Ram Chhabila Sahni @ Ram Chhavila Sahni, Resident of Village- narkatiya Ward no- 12, Post- Singhwahini, P.SSonbarsa, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narsingh Tanti, A.P.P.
Mr. Arjun Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel, who appears on behalf of complainant/opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner, husband of the opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Sections 498A, 323, 307, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, in which, cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint, complainant was married with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39344 of 2024(4) dt.19-09-2024 2/3 this petitioner on 17.05.2010 and thereafter, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by petitioner for dowry.
4. While denying the allegations made in the complaint petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he happens to be husband of opposite party no. 2. He never committed torture or harassed the opposite party no. 2 for dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after filing of the present complaint on 19.03.2012, the complainant has changed her mind and solemnized marriage with one Ram Chhavila Sahni S/o Tapeshwar Sahni in the district of Sitamarhi and out of the wedlock, she was blessed with three children.
5. Sri Arjun Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the contention made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let this petitioner, as named above, 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 the learned A.C.J.M. - I, Sitamarhi / concerned court in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39344 of 2024(4) dt.19-09-2024 3/3 with Complaint Case No. C-1/403/2012, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T