Poonam Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65756 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

POONAM DEVI W/o Mahendra Yadav Resident of Village - Kudrasi (Durdasi), P.S.- Rampur, Rampur Chauram, Distt.- Arwal. 2.

Mahendra Yadav Son of Late Rajnath Singh Resident of Village - Kudrasi (Durdasi), P.S.- Rampur, Rampur Chauram, Distt.- Arwal. 3.

Niraj Kumar Son of Mahenbdra Yadav Resident of Village - Kudrasi (Durdasi), P.S.- Rampur, Rampur Chauram, Distt.- Arwal. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 16-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

The allegation against the petitioners is that they being

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65756 of 2021(2) dt.16-05-2022 2/3 the in-laws of the O.P. No.2 have subjected her to torture due to demand of dowry and threatened to solemnize second marriage of her husband.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Petitioner nos.1 and 2 are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the informant while petitioner no.3 is the brother-in-law of the informant. It is further submitted that no demand of dowry was made by the petitioners but to separate her husband from the joint family, this case has been lodged by the informant. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65756 of 2021(2) dt.16-05-2022 3/3 bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Arwal Mahila P.S. Case No.10/2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T