Md Mansur Akhtar Siddiqi @ Mansur Akhtar Siddiqi @ Mansur Siddiqi @ Mansur Fatar Siddiqi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53372 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2020 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE District- Nawada ====================================================== Md Mansur Akhtar Siddiqi @ Mansur Akhtar Siddiqi @ Mansur Siddiqi @ Mansur Fatar Siddiqi S/o Md. Abdul Gaffar Siddiqui R/o ward no. 41, Block Jhariya, Vill- Bagdegi Basti, P.S. - Jorapokhar, Dhanbad, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Shabina Naz @ Arzu Pravin D/o Abdul Qayyum Siddiqui R/o Mohalla - Rajauli Takia Kajlamani, P.O. and P.S. - Rajauli, Distt. - Nawadah, Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Abu Bakar, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP For the O.P.-2 :
None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner, husband of the opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 498-A, 120-B, 380, 420, 406, 494 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against petitioner is of matrimonial cruelty and demand for dowry.
4. While denying the allegations made in the present petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53372 of 2024(7) dt.22-01-2025 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he happens to be husband of opposite party no. 2. At no point of time, petitioner demanded any dowry or committed torture with opposite party no. 2 and is still ready to keep the opposite party no. 2 with full honour and dignity. Moreover, the case is triable by the learned 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.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let this petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Class, Nawada in connection with Complaint Case No. 205 of 2020, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T