Md. Murtuza @ Lalu And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7956 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -88 Year- 2016 Thana -CHAUSA District- MADHEPURA ======================================================

1. Md. Murtuza @ Lalu, son of Late Md. Shamsuddin.

2. Md. Dojahan @ Md. Dojahar @ Dojahan, son of Md. Murtuza @ Lalu

3. Md. Salauddin, son of Md. Murtuza @ Lalu, All residents of villageBirbal Tola, P.S. Chausa, Distric- Madhepura. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Md. Shamimul Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Anant Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 88 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. Allegedly, Razina Khatoon the daughter of the informant was married to Md. Ibrahim son of petitioner no.2 on 24.01.2006 and after one year of marriage the husband and other in-laws including the petitioners started torturing and assaulting her due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of Rs. 1 lac and one motorcycle. Out of wedlock there are two sons aged about 6 years and 2 years and the son-in-law Md. Ibrahim used to come at the house of the informant and used to assault Razina Khatoon and children, resulting, the informant and his family

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7956 of 2017 (2) dt.02-03-2017 2/2 members are anxious about the maintenance of Razina Khatoon and their children.

Submission is of false implication and that the marriage has taken place 10 years ago, the petitioner no.1 is father-in-law and petitioner nos. 2 & 3 are dewars, they are living separately from the husband of the daughter of the informant, they have got no concern with the daughter of the informant and her husband, there is no specific allegation against them, as such, the petitioners deserve sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Udakishunganj, Madhepura, in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 88 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T