Pintu Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2419 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2822 Year- 2014 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Pintu Kumar, S/o Sri Nathuni Mahto, resident of Village- Fatehpur, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Phul Kumari W/o Pintu Kumar & D/o Jaynandan Mahto At present resident of Mohalla- Purani Gudari (Shauchalay Gali), P.S.- Town, District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A), 323, 379/34 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 498(A) of the IPC and 3⁄4 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2419 of 2018 (2) dt.17-01-2018 2/2 is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. 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 counsel for the State, 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. (East), Muzaffarpur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 2822 of 2014, corresponding to Tr. No. 2179 of 2016/1760 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T