Sushila Bhatt v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55492 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2020 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.

SUSHILA BHATT WIFE OF SRI AJESH KUMAR BHATT RESIDENT OF F-17, P.C. COLONY, KANKARBAGH, TOWN AND DISTRICT OF PATNA 2.

AJESH KUMAR BHATT @ ANJESH BHATT SON OF LATE NARSINGH PRASAD ROY RESIDENT OF F-17, P.C. COLONY, KANKARBAGH, TOWN AND DISTRICT OF PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

SHREYA CHOUDHARY D/O LATE BRAJ KISHORE CHOUDHARY RESIDENT OF QR NO.-174(A), RAILWAY COLONY, JHAJHA JAMUI BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Praveen Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-10-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of eight weeks.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in Jhajha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2020 registered under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 498(A), 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation against the petitioners is of committing torture

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55492 of 2021(2) dt.29-10-2021 2/3 upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner No. 1 is mother-in-law and petitioner No. 2 is father-in-law of the complainant. There is no injury report in support of the offence under Section-307 of the Indian Penal Code. Rest of the offences are triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners have 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. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui in connection with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55492 of 2021(2) dt.29-10-2021 3/3 Jhajha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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.

(Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T