Vinay Shankar Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51892 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2094 Year-2021 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Vinay Shankar Choudhary S/O Ram Sagar Choudhary R/O Village And P.O.- Govindpur Bela, Ps. Valigaon And Dist. Vaishali, Bihar- 843114 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar BIHAR 2.
Simrap Kumari W/O Vinay Shankar Chaudhary R/O Village- Govindpur Bela Ps. Valigaon Dist. Vaishali. Current Address- D/O Narendra Prasad Village And Post. Kamtaul Ps. Lalganj Dist. Darbhanga ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Avanish Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Complaint Case No. 2094 of 2021 dated 23.10.2021 registered for the offences punishable u/s 498A, 494, 379, 307, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the Complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- as dowry and ousted her from the matrimonial home.
2/4 It is further alleged that the petitioner solemnized second marriage with one Babita Kumari.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. It is the further submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the Complainant. Learned counsel has further submitted that the allegation of second marriage against the petitioner is false and concocted story and no evidence or documents have been filed by the Complainant to support her allegation. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the Complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has 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."
Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s).
3/4 out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the allegation being general and omnibus against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 2094 of 2021, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition :- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
8. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty
4/4 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.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T