Juhi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41662 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-846 Year-2017 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
JUHI KUMARI S/o- LATE PRAMOD CHAUDHARY Village- Nagargama Ps- Dalasingsarai Dist- Samastipur 2.
Gayatri Devi wife of Late Pramod Chaudhary Village- Nagargama PsDalasingsarai Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sonu Kumar son of Saroj Kumar Village- Mathura Pur Ps- Mathurapur OP Warisnagar Dist- Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surya Narayan Roy For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha :
Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the learned court below.
3. As per the prosecution case, when the complainant was going to Mathurapur Ghat hat from house, all the accused persons including the petitioners forcibly kidnapped the complainant in a Bolero, snatched his mobile and threatened to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41662 of 2023(2) dt.04-08-2023 2/3 kill him. Thereafter, they forcibly married him with petitioner no.1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner no.2 is mother of petitioner no.1. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners. He further submits that real fact that is that marriage of petitioner no.1 has been performed with complainant in the year 2017 but after marriage complainant demanded dowry and lastly petitioner was ousted from her matrimonial house for which petitioner no.1 has filed C.R. No.286 of 2017 against the complainant and his family members . He further submits that petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application.
5. Learned APP for the State along with learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners, let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41662 of 2023(2) dt.04-08-2023 3/3 Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below, where the case is pending/Successor court, in connection with C.R. No. 846 of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438
(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T