Rajendra Mehta @ Rajendra Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53434 of 2016 (2) dt.20-12-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.53434 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2016 Thana -PAUTHU District- AURANGABAD ======================================================
1. Rajendra Mehta @ Rajendra Singh S/o Vishindeo Mehta
2. Sumitra Devi W/o Rajendra Mehta @ Rajendra Singh
3. Shobha Devi D/o Rajendra Mehta @ Rajendra Singh
4. Ranju Devi W/o Gautam Kumar all Resident of R/o Vill-Alpa, P.S.- Pauthu, Distt.-Aurangabad
5. Kamla Mehta S/o Late Narayan Verma Resident of R/o Vill-Bhurkunda, P.S.-Rafiganj, Dist.-Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Shailendra Kumar -1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 20-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498-A, 494, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to prosecution case, the informant was married with one Gautam Kumar in the year 2014 and after 5-6 months, the husband of the informant has solemnized second marriage. It is also alleged that the in-laws of the informant have assaulted and ousted her from her matrimonial house. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53434 of 2016 (2) dt.20-12-2016 submitted that these petitioners are close relative of the husband of the informant except petitioner no. 4, who happens to be wife of Gautam Kumar. Petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed offence in any manner. Moreover, it has been submitted that no marriage has been performed between Gautam Kumar and the informant. Further, there is no ingredient available on record to make out a case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned A.P.P. has submitted that these petitioners are named in the F.I.R.
Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail application is allowed. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below, within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand rupees only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M, 2nd Aurangabad in connection with Pauthu P.S. Case No. 11 of 2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Arvind Srivastava, J) Brajesh/- U T