Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1391/2017rejected

Sajid Siddique v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-05-19Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1391 of 2017 (3) dt.19-05-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1391 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Sajid Siddique, Son of Abdul Wari, Resident of Village-Doriya-Sonapur, P.S.-Simraha, Dist-Araria .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Darkhshan Naz, Daughter of Manjar Alam, Resident of VillageKhalilabad, Ward No. 25, Police Station & District-Araria .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Bharat Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Araria (Mahila) Police Station Case No. 64 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 342 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against this petitioner and no specific overt act is attributed to him. In fact, the petitioner happens to be husband of the informant has never assaulted the informant nor demanded any downy in any manner. The petitioner admits his marriage with the informant

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1391 of 2017 (3) dt.19-05-2017 and is ready to keep her wife with full dignity and honour. Statement to that effect is made in paragraph-13 of the petition. Hence, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is direct allegation of assault and demand of dowry against the petitioner, who is husband of the informant. Moreover, in spite of all efforts, mediation has not been arrived at between the parties, which is evident from Mediator's report. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T