Ramchandra Mishra v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.46346 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1585 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSITAMARHI ====================================================== Ramchandra Mishra, S/o of Late Harinanadan mishra, R/o- Hathsaar, District- Sheohar.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Bihar
2. Kamini Kumari, W/o Manish Kumar Miashra, resident of villageHathsaar, P.S.- Purnahiya, District-Sheohar at present d/o OF Sarabjit Jha, village- Manik Chowk, P.S.- Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A)/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the D. P. Act.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46346 of 2017 (2) dt.21-09-2017 2/2 petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner is in-laws of the victim. He is separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. 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. On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and opposite party no. 2, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Sitamarhi Sadar, in connection with Complaint Case No. C1-1585/2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T