← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50169/2024bail granted

Md. Yasir Imam v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-15Mr. Justice S. B. P. Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50169 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2607 Year-2020 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== Md. Yasir Imam Son of Sheikh Ali Imam Resident of - Khaje Kala, P.S.- Patna City, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sahina Praveen Daughter of Mojibullah Khan Resident of Brahampur, P.S. - Bhagwan Bazar, District - Saran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Adv.

:

Mr. Sagrik, Adv.

:

Mr. Aditya Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP For the Respondent :

Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.

:

Ms. Laxmi Kumari, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-02-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2607 of 2020 for the offence under Sections 149, 323, 498A, 504, 506 of the I.P.C. and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant - Sahina Praween is the wife of petitioner - Md. Yasir Imam. Her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner on 06.06.2015 as per Muslim-Sunni Law and Shariat. After marriage, she came to her matrimonial house, where after one month, the petitioner and his parents started torturing her in various ways due to non

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50169 of 2024(4) dt.15-02-2025 2/3 fulfillment of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Complaint petition is completely false, fabricated, baseless and concocted one. The petitioner and his family never demanded any dowry. He submits that on several occasions, the informant and her family members tortured and assaulted old and ailing parents of the petitioner. Lastly he prayed to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.

6. During course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is already paying Rs. 6,000/- per month pursuant to the order in maintenance case and again he is also ready to pay Rs. 2,000/- in addition to that. All the above amount will be adjusted in final settlement of maintenance passed by any Court.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50169 of 2024(4) dt.15-02-2025 3/3 (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Saran at Chapra in connection with Complaint Case No. 2607 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (S. B. Pd. Singh, J) prabhakar/- U T