Babunand Manjhi And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41918 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -20 Year- 2017 Thana -JADOPUR District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================

1. Babunand Manjhi Son of Gheghi Manjhi

2. Nanhak Manjhi@ Nanhak @ Munna Manjhi Son of Babunand Manjhi

3. Dhanjit Manjhi Son of Babunand Manjhi

4. Sugia Devi Wife of Babunand Manjhi

5. Chhatish Manjhi@ Satish Manjhi Son of Babunand Manjhi

6. Sandeep Manjhi Son of Babunand Manjhi All resident of Village- Jagari tola, P.S. Jadopur, District- Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Saroj Devi Wife of Ranjan Manjhi All resident of Village- Jagari tola, P.S. Jadopur, District- Gopalganj, Presently residing at Village- Ramdada, P.S.- Duraundha, District- Siwan.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey No-5 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Rabindra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jadopur @Yadopur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2017 (G.R. No.636 of 2017) for the offence instituted under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioners is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41918 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners are in-laws of the informant. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. The petitioners have further relied upon the judgment of this court, in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Jadopur @Yadopur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2017 (G.R. No.636 of 2017) on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Gopalganj, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Amit/- U T