Shyam Babu Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39488 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Shyam Babu Mahto Son of Bilat Mahto Resident Of Village- Kahuwa Jagdishpur, P.S.- Biraul, Dist.- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Baidya Nath Prasad, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Kumar Praveen, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 114 of 2021 dated 14.12.2021 registered for the offences punishable u/s 498A, 323, 504, 34 of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner and the coaccused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of. dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39488 of 2024(3) dt.07-08-2024 2/3 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 for 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 clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39488 of 2024(3) dt.07-08-2024 3/3 named, is directed to 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 learned Court concerned, Darbhanga, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 114 of 2021.

7. The application stands allowed.

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