Md. Apsar @ Md. Afsar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42083 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1850 Year-2019 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran ====================================================== Md. Apsar @ Md. Afsar Son Of Md. Mustafa R/O- Mohalla- Ganj No. 1, Ward No. 16, Near Bari Masjid Dwardevi Chauk, Bettiah, P.S.- Bettiah Town, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Nasreen Khatoon W/O- Md. Apsar @ Md. Afsar, D/O- Md. Shaukat R/OMohalla- Ganj No. 1, Ward No. 16, Near Bari Masjid Dwardevi Chauk, Bettiah, P.S.- Bettiah Town, Distt.-West Champaran At Present Resident Of Village- Parsauni Ray Barwa, P.S.- Sathi, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raki Alam, Advocate For the Complainant : Mr. Rajdeep Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-10-2024 Heard Mr. Raki Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajdeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Complainant and Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Complaint Case No. 1850 of 2019, dated 19.11.2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Petitioner is husband of the informant. Allegation

2/4 is of demand of dowry and torture for the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on the ground that the petitioner is the husband of the informant. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Upon notice, learned counsel for the Complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) has appeared and outrightly submits that the Complainant/Opposite party No. 2 is not ready to live with the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction submits that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month to the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 and his son as a maintenance till the disposal of the Maintenance Case, if any. The bank details of which is as follows:

Complainant :Nasrin Khatoon Bank Account No. 39372826648 IFSC Code- SBIN0001219 Branch Name- State Bank of India

7. Learned counsel for the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 has no objection in this regard.

3/4

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Complaint Case No. 1850 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions :- (i) The petitioner shall deposit Rs. 5,000/- by way of demand draft in favour of the Complainant/Opposite Party No.

2 at the time of furnishing bail bond and the learned Court below is directed to hand over the same in favour of the Complainant or his representative and the petitioner shall pay Rs. 5,000/- per month regularly to the Complainant/Opposite Party No.2 in her Bank account and if the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid maintenance amount to the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2, the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 shall be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancellation of the bail bond of the petitioner.

(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

4/4 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T