Kameshwar Singh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47564 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2022 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.
Kameshwar Singh Yadav Son Of Late Shiv Murat Singh Resident Of Village- Deshopur , P.S.- Mohaina , District -KAIMUR At Bhabua 2.
Panchratna Devi Wife Of Kameshwar Singh Yadav Resident Of VillageDeshopur , P.S.- Mohaina , District -KAIMUR At Bhabua 3.
Jitendra Singh Yadav Son Of Kameshwar Singh Yadav Resident Of VillageDeshopur , P.S.- Mohaina , District -KAIMUR At Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Kusum Kumari Wife Of Satendra Singh Yadav Resident Of VillageDeshopur , P.S.- Mohaina , District -kaimur At Bhabua At Present Resident Of Village- Gaura, Ps- Nuaon, Distt- Kaimur At Bhabua ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy Mr. Parwej Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons are said to have tortured opposite party no. 2 and expelled her from her matrimonial home for nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47564 of 2023(3) dt.12-10-2023 2/2 petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioners are in-laws and family member of the O.P. No. 2. He further submits that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners. He also submits that the husband and the O.P. No. 2 live separately from the petitioners and they were not concern with the petitioners. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 opposed prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No.14 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T