Md Imtiyaz @Md Imtiyaz Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37341 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2022 Thana- BARAHAT District- Banka ====================================================== Md Imtiyaz @MD Imtiyaz Ansari Son Of Md. Izhar Resident Of VillageParbatta, Ps- Barahat, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Bibi Chanda Khatoon Wife Of Md. Imtiyaz @ Md. Imtiyaz Ansari Resident Of Village- Parbatta, Ps- Barahat, District- Banka ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad, Adv.

For the Informant :

Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-10-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 151 of 2022 dated 21.06.2022 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 498A and 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured and harassed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37341 of 2023(3) dt.30-10-2023 2/3 complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the husband of the informant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the informant is the third wife of the petitioner. The petitioner has relied upon the 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." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

6. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37341 of 2023(3) dt.30-10-2023 3/3 anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, 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. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Banka in connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 151 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.

9. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T