Md. Saddam Hussain @ Md. Saddam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44536 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2021 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Md. Saddam Hussain @ Md. Saddam Son of Late Aslam @ Md. Aslam Resident of Village- Katehar, P.S.- suryagadha, District- Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Parwej Khan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 27-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It is alleged against the petitioner that he

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44536 of 2021(3) dt.27-04-2022 2/3 established sexual relationship with the informant in the pretext of performing marriage with her but thereafter denied to perform marriage and when the informant and her family members put pressure upon the petitioner he demanded rupees ten lakhs as dowry demand for performing marriage.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case just to put pressure upon the petitioner to perform marriage with the informant. The informant is a married lady and she has not been divorced by her husband.

Learned A.P.P for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted after going through the case diary that the witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The informant herself has supported the prosecution version as gets reflected from her 164 Cr.P.C statement. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44536 of 2021(3) dt.27-04-2022 3/3 Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shageer/- U T