Tuntun Paswan @ Tuntun Dusad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63427 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2019 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

Tuntun Paswan @ Tuntun Dusad, Son Of Late Chaturgun Paswan R/O Village- Pathra, Post- Ikkil, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad 2.

Kausalya Devi @ Fulmaniya Devi, Wife Of Tuntun Paswan R/O VillagePathra, Post- Ikkil, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad 3.

Ajay Kumar @ Jay Kumar, Son Of Jitendra Paswan R/O Village- Pathra, Post- Ikkil, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Smt. Pinku Devi, Wife Of Jitendra Paswan, D/O Kunwar Paswan R/O Village And Post- Salempur, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sujit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-12-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to remove the defect as pointed out by the office during course of the day.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the father-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63427 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 2/3 in-law, mother-in-law and petitioner no.3 is step-son of the complainant and the complainant alleges that she was married to one Jitendra Paswan in the Year 2002. It is next alleged that after marriage, the complainant was being tortured by the accused persons including the petitioners.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that the complainant was married to Jitendra Paswan after the death of his first wife Savitri Devi in the Year 2001 from whom Jitendra had one son and since the complainant did not like her step-son, as such, the dispute used to occur. It is further submitted that no specific allegation have been alleged against the petitioners and whenever any dispute arises between the husband and wife the entire family members are implicated.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63427 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 3/3 to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Complaint Case No.96 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T