Anil Gupta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42206 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-600 Year-2018 Thana- KHAGARIA COMPALINT CASE District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
ANIL GUPTA Son of Late Deep Narayan Sah Resident of Sahid Chauk, Jainagar, P.S.- Jainagar, Dist.- Madhubani.
2.
Suraj Gupta Son of Late Deep Narayan Sah Resident of Sahid Chauk, Jainagar, P.S.- Jainagar, Dist.- Madhubani.
3.
Geeta Devi Wife of Suraj Gupta Resident of Sahid Chauk, Jainagar, P.S.- Jainagar, Dist.- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
Kumari Jyoti Wife of Vivek Kumar Pankaj D/o Jainarayan Prasad Gupta, At present resident of Gol Godam Road, Ward No.- 02, P.S. and Dist. - Khagaria.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nirmala Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution allegation in short is that on hatching conspiracy, the marriage of the informant took place with an impotent person.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 31.5.2019. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. Charge-sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42206 of 2019(2) dt.10-07-2019 2/2 has been submitted in the present case. On the earlier occasion also, the victim and her family members have instituted case for similar offence against the petitioners and their family members. It is alleged that marriage of the complainant took place with an impotent person. The allegations made by the complainant is denied. There is no substantive evidence to show that husband of the complainant is an impotent person.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the Complaint Case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Khagaria in connection with Complaint Case No. 600(C) of 2018. Since the matter relates to the dispute between husband and wife, 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) Pankaj/- U T