Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24604/2014rejected

Bharat Ram @ Sunil Ram @ Sunil v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-01-08Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24604 of 2014 (5) dt.08-01-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24604 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -113 Year- 2013 Thana -GAYGHAT District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Bharat Ram @ Sunil Ram @ Sunil, son of Mahendra Ram, Resident of village - Loh Bandra, Police Station - Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Veena Devi, daughter of Mahendra Ram, Resident of village - Loh Bandra, P.O. Godan Patti, P.S. Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Naushad Uzzoha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Pd.Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 08-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner, apprehending his arrest in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 113 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, seeks the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

Allegedly, the petitioner being the husband used to torture and assault the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of motorcycle and cash and further the petitioner used to cause threat to burn her and assault her. It is also alleged that the petitioner wants to re-marry and other accused persons are

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24604 of 2014 (5) dt.08-01-2015 assisting him.

Submission is of false implication and that entire accusations are false and concocted. The petitioner is still ready to keep his wife. The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. In the facts and circumstances, as stated above, considering the specific allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not persuaded to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly, such prayer stands rejected. However, in case and if so advised, the petitioner surrenders and seeks bail then his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Vats/- U T