← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37323/2025bail granted

Rajeshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-29Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37323 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2844 Year-2022 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rajeshwar Singh S/o Munni singh R/o Vill.- Chhota Bariyarpur, Mahashray Nagar, PS- Chitwani, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kumari Poonam W/o Rajeshwar Singh, D/o Jagdish Rao R/o Vill.- Chhota Bariyarpur, Mahashray Nagar, PS- Chitwani, District- East Champaran At present R/o Vill.- Mathiya, PO- Murli Parsauni, PS- Balthar, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2844C of 2022 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the complaint, the complainant alleged that she was married to the petitioner in the year 2007 and the couple was blessed with three children but she was tortured for dowry and finally in the year 2022, she was ousted from the home leading to the present case.

4. In this case, notice was issued to opposite party

2/4 no.2 and she also filed Vakalatnama and the name of Mr. Sagar Kumar, Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma and Mr. Hemant Ray are appearing but none are present on call.

5. It is the contention of the petitioner as narrated by Mr. Pandey that both are in job, the petitioner is in a agriculture department while the lady is a teacher. He has tried his level best to bring her back home but failed. According to the petitioner, the door is always open whenever the lady chooses, she can walk in. However, considering the fact that he has responsibility of three children, he on his own would like to contribute Rs.3000/- each (totalling Rs.9000/-) which shall go in the account of the lady every month on 10th day. Failure to do so, the informant shall be free to take recourse for cancellation of bail bond, if relief is granted to him.

6. As recorded above, the informant upon notice appeared but there is no appearance, the case is there, the petitioner will face the music, he is a working person, putting him jail will not good to any for the family, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs. 3000/- each (totalling Rs.9000/-) which shall go in the account of the lady every month on 10th day and failure to do so, the informant shall be

3/4 free to take recourse for cancellation of bail bond.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a maintenance Case has been filed by the lady, once the order is passed in Maintenance Case, this order shall merge with that order.

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the subordinate court within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Complaint Case No. 2844C of 2022 to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other conditions.

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation

4/4 and make himself available to the police as and when required; (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T