Shyam Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53809 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-157 Year-2020 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE District- Madhubani ====================================================== Shyam Pandit Son Of Jahuli Pandit Resident Of Village - Samda Islamiya Tol, P.S. Benipatti, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Bibha @ Bibha Kumari Daughter Of Ram Prasad Pandit Resident Of Village - Satlakha, P.S. - Rahika, District - Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gagam Deo Yadav, Advocate Mr.Ravi Prakash, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-11-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with C.R Case No. 157/2020 dated 25.02.2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 307, 379 and 504 of the I.P.C.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53809 of 2023(4) dt.23-11-2023 2/3 dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is husband of the complainant. 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). 2207 of 2023 arising 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, 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53809 of 2023(4) dt.23-11-2023 3/3 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Madhubani in connection with C.R Case No. 157/2020, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconcilation or one time settlement.

9. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T