Umesh Yadav v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43340 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2238 Year- 2015 Thana -GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGOPALGANJ ====================================================== Umesh Yadav Son of Sri Dasharath Yadav, Resident of Village-Khairati Hussainganj, P.S. Hussainganj, District Siwan, at Present Resident of Bhagirathi Lakshmipur, P.S. Mirganj, District Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sanu Devi Wife of Umesh Yadav, D/o Rabindra Yadav, Resident of Khairati Hussainganj, P.s. Hussainganj, District Siwan, at Present Resident of Village Ghusia, P.S.Mirganj, District Gopalganj. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Naresh Prasad, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, complainant and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2238 of 2015, Tr. No. 2827 of 2017 for the offences instituted under Sections 323, 498(A), 406 and 120(B) in which cognizance has been taken under Section 498(A) of the IPC and 4 of the D. P. Act.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the complainant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43340 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. He has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has further 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. It has been submitted by learned counsels for the State and the complainant that the petitioner is named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No. 2238 of 2015, Tr. No. 2827 of 2017 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Gopalganj, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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