Praneh Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47987 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1287 Year-2023 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Praneh Ranjan S/O Prabhat Ranjan Srivastav, R/o- Mohalla- Damuchak, P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Tanya W/O Praneh Ranjan R/O- Mohalla- Damuchak, P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur. D/O Govind Prasad, R/O Sumitra Sadan, Ashopur, Flat no. 401, Ward no. 20, PS- Shahpur, Distt- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akrity Aishwarya, Advocate For the Complainant :

Mr. (Dr.) Anjani Pd. Singh, Advocate Mr. Sunny Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant/complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Complaint Case No. 1287 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of

2/4 demand of Rs. 10 lakhs as dowry and ousted her from her matrimonial home. It is further alleged that complainant's inlaws also tried to set her on fire, but she somehow saved herself and they also inflicted knife blow near her eyes.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the complainant. The allegation levelled in the complaint petition is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged in the complaint petition. The present case is the counter blast of Kazi Mohamadpur P.S. case No. 176 of 2022 lodged by the father of the petitioner against the complainant and other accused persons and the police has submitted the final form no. 68 of 2024 dated 19.02.2024 against the accused persons. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the complainant and he has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of "Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498 A of the the Indian Penal Code is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further

3/4 relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another passed in Criminal Appeal No (s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned counsel for the informant/complainant as well as learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the petitioner named-above, in the event of his arrest / surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1287 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, on further condition:

(i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically

4/4 present before the learned trial Court on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

7. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.

8. This application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Shahnawaz/- U T