Manish Pandey v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6015 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2559 Year-2016 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Manish Pandey S/o Late Sumeshwar Pandey, R/o Village- Bishunpur, P.S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Pinki Pandey D/o Suresh Pandey, R/o Vill.- Prasidh Nagar, P.S- Vaishali, District- Vaishali.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Devendra Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Ahtash Ali Khan, APP For O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Anish Chandra, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. An opportunity was given to the parties for making one time settlement. When the matter is taken up today, it has been submitted that the settlement could not be arrived between the parties.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6015 of 2018(4) dt.11-04-2018 2/2 of tampering of 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 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 State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/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 learned S.D.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Vaishali Complaint case No.2559 of 2016, Trial No.2551 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Narendra/- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T