Gopal Thakur @ Gopal Kumar Thakur @ Guddu Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37615 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur ====================================================== GOPAL THAKUR @ GOPAL KUMAR THAKUR @ GUDDU THAKUR Son of Late Devendra Thakur Resident of village - Chakhaji, P.S. - Mufassil, Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

VEENA DEVI Wife of Gopal Kumar Thakur Resident of village - Chakhaji, P.S. - Mufassil, Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar No1, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-06-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 76 of 2019 dated 14.10.2019 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 323, 341, 494, 498A and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the coaccused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- as dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37615 of 2023(2) dt.28-06-2023 2/2 The present case has been lodged against the petitioner after lapse of 14 years of the marriage and in the meantime, the informant gave birth to five children. He has further submitted that the petitioner neither demanded dowry nor tortured the informant. The petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. He has further submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the informant who is in custody since 02.01.2023. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail petition of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-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, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur Mahila P.S. Case No. 76 of 2019.

The application stands allowed.

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