Asharfi Sahani And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48048 of 2014 (2) dt.30-04-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.48048 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -104 Year- 2012 Thana -JANDAHA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. ASHARFI SAHANI, SON OF BATAHU SAHANI.
2. MAHENDRA SAHANI, SON OF BATAHU SAHANI, ABOVE BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MALPUR, P.S. - PATEPUR, DISTRICT - VAISHALI.
3. MUNNI DEVI, WIFE OF MOHAN SAHANI.
4. MOHAN SAHANI, SON OF RAM DAYAL SAHANI, ABOVE BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - HARPUR BHINDI, P.S. - TAJPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR.
5. SHYAM SAHANI, SON OF RAJI SAHANI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - TISWARA, P.S. - SARAI RANJAN, DISTRICT - SAMASTIPUR. .... .... PETITIONER/S
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Bela Singh, Advocate. Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dashrath Mehta (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners are accused in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2012 registered under Sections 417 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The allegation is that marriage of Sarita Kumari, daughter of informant, was settled with Sohan Sahni, son of Ram Dayal Sahni, and accused persons received Rs.1,25,000/- for marriage expenses but later on they made demand of Rs.2,00,000/-
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48048 of 2014 (2) dt.30-04-2015 and a motorcycle, otherwise marriage will not be performed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 5 are the relatives of Ram Dayal Sahni, father of Sohan Sahni, and they are mediator of negotiation of marriage of daughter of the informant which is said to be fixed but they have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 3 is the wife of petitioner no. 4, who is the brother of Sohan Sahni. It is further submitted that, in fact, the informant negotiated for marriage of Sohan Sahni but marriage could not be settled due to none matching.
Considering the aforesaid submissions, let the above named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T