Hafiz Inamul Haque And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.10176 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -9021 Year- 2016 Thana -GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGOPALGANJ ======================================================
1. Hafiz Inamul Haque, son of Late Md. Basir,
2. Chand Tara Khatoon, wife of Hafiz Inamul Haque,
3. Gajala Khatoon @ Gajala Praveen, daughter of Hafiz Inamul Haque, all residents of Village- Pakhopali Kadir Tola, Police Station- Uchakagaon, District- Gopalganj.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Rehana Praveen, wife of Muhammad Goas Siddique, daughter of Tahid Alam, Resident of Village- Bishesherpur, Police Station- Barauli, DistrictGopalganj. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Javed Aslam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 9021 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections-498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner Nos. 1, 2 & 3 are father-in-law, motherin-law and Nanad of the complainant respectively. From the complaint petition itself, it appears that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. In such circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed it is ordered that the petitioners named above, in the event
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10176 of 2017 (4) dt.16-05-2017 2/2 of their arrest or surrender in the court below within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Complaint Case No. 9021 of 2016 to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, Gopaalganj subject to condition as laid down u/S 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned,
(2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason, will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioners and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.
(Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T