Imran Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.670 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-873 Year-2018 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE District- Madhubani ====================================================== IMRAN AHMAD, S/o MD RIZWAN ALAM, R/o Village - Gadha Ward No. -12 @ Garha, P.S. - Pupri, Dist. - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

SHAGUFTA PRAVEEN @ SAGUPTA PRABEEN, W/o Imran Ahmad D/o Anisur Rahman, R/o Village - Gadha @ Garha, P.S. - Pupri, Dist. - Sitamarhi, At Present R/o Village - Sakari, P.S. - Sakari, Dist. - Madhubani. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the informant :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-03-2021 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through Video Conferencing. This application, for grant of regular bail, arises out of C.R. Case No.-873/2018(CIS)/873/2018(CR)/Trial No.2719 of 2019, disclosing offences under Sections 341, 323, 342, 379, 307, 449, 504, 506, 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The allegation, as per the First Information Report is that the complaint-Opposite Party No.2 was married with the petitioner in the year 2018 and after some time, the petitioner and other family members started demanding a sum of Rs.2

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.670 of 2021(2) dt.08-03-2021 2/3 lakhs as dowry and due to non-fulfillment of demand, the petitioner and others tortured physically as well as mentally to the complainant-Opposite Party No.2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case due to oblique motive. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is ready and willing to keep the Opposite Party No.2-informant as his wife with all care, dignity and honour. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 08.07.2020. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner may be released on provisional bail inasmuch as Opposite Party No.2 is also ready and willing to stay with the petitioner as his wife peacefully. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 08.07.

2020, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner, Imran Ahmad, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.670 of 2021(2) dt.08-03-2021 3/3 C.R. Case No.-873/2018(CIS)/873/2018(CR)/Trial No.2719 of 2019.

It is made clear at the time of furnishing bail bond, all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) sanjeev/- U T