Jitendra Kumar Sah @ Bijendra Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44170 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2018 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar Sah @ Bijendra Kumar Sah, Son of Ram Bachan Sah, Resident of Village- Kanchanpur, P.S.- Sasaram, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Renu Devi, Daughter of Gopal Sah, Resident of Village- Mishrawaliya, P.O. and P.S.- Rajpur, District- Rohtas.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 although the notice has been duly served upon her. Learned APP for the State is present.

The petitioner in this case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.206 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier vide order dated 18.07.2019, the petitioner has been granted provisional bail by a learned coordinate Bench of this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44170 of 2019(3) dt.25-09-2019 2/2 perusal of the complaint petition it would appear that there are only vague allegations of cruelty against the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the allegation of demand of dowry has also been made in a totally causal manner only with an intention to harass this petitioner.

Since no one has appeared to oppose this application, considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the marriage between the petitioner and the complainant is said to have taken place in the year 2014 and there seem to be a general and omnibus kind of allegation in the complaint petition as also it appears that the parties have got a child also from the wedlock and on earlier occasion also when some dispute arose between the parties they had resolved the same and the complainant had come back to the matrimonial home, considering all these things, let the provisional bail granted to the petitioner be confirmed on the same bail bonds subject to the conditions under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T