Raja Ram Rai @ Raja Ram Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49829 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2022 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Raja Ram Rai @ Raja Ram Ray Son of Late Kailash Ray @ Late Kailash Rai Resident of village - Munni Baihri, Police Station - Piyar, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Naveen Kumar @ Navin Kumar Son of Late Bhajan Ray Resident of village - Dhurlakh Tole Bantar, Police Station - Warisnagar, District - Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-10-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 304B of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The S.H.O., Warisnagar Police Station and the I.O. of the case, in compliance of the order dated 18.10.2024, are present in the Court.

4. Learned A.P.P., based on instruction, submits that from perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that the information was received in the police station on 01.12.2022 and on the same day, the FIR was instituted. Learned A.P.P. further submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49829 of 2024(3) dt.25-10-2024 2/2 that no doubt, the date of occurrence is dated 31.07.2013 but then the informant initially had instituted a complaint in the year 2013 itself and the police was directed to register an FIR but the information was received in the police station not in the year 2013 but on 01.12.2022, as such, the FIR was instituted on the said date.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, after arguing vehemently for some time realizing his difficulty, seeks permission to withdraw the regular bail application with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

6. Permission is accorded.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn in connection with Warisnagar P.S. Case No. 384 of 2022 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1844 of 2013 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur/Successor Court.

8. The personal appearance of the S.H.O., Warisnagar Police Station and the I.O. of the case is dispensed with. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T