Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjat Chauhan @ Ranjit Chauhan @ Ranjit Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43585 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2018 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Sheohar ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjat Chauhan @ Ranjit Chauhan @ Ranjit Mahto S/o Rampukar Mahto R/o vill - Mahuava, P.S. - Chiraiya, Distt. - Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Archana Kumari W/o Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjat Chauhan, D/o Hans Lal Mahto R/o vill - Mahuava, P.S. - Chiraiya, Distt. - East Champaran, Presently R/o vill - Kamrauli, P.S. - Piprahi, Distt. - Sheohar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-03-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 139 of 2018 for the offence under Sections 498 A, 379 and 323 of the I.P.C. and 3 / 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. It is a case of matrimonial dispute between the parties. Petitioner - Ranjit Kumar is that husband of opposite party no. 2 - Archana Kumari. Allegation against the petitioner and his family members is of torturing, assaulting and ousting the complainant from her matrimonial house due to non-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43585 of 2024(3) dt.04-03-2025 2/3 fulfillment of dowry demand.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent, committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. No any occurrence has ever been taken place as alleged by the complainant. He submits that petitioner is ready to keep her with full honour and dignity without any grievance but the complainant refused to live along with the petitioner.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.

6. During course of argument learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per order passed in maintenance case petitioner is regularly paying maintenance amount i.e Rs. 6,000/- per month to the complainant, which prima facie shows his bona-fide conduct. Learned counsel for the complainant also concedes this fact.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt/production of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43585 of 2024(3) dt.04-03-2025 3/3 Sheohar in connection with Complaint Case No. 139 of 2018 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) prabhakar/- U