Umesh Mehta And ANR. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 37233 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2014 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- MUNGER ======================================================

1. Umesh Mehta son of Late Sahdeo Mehta.

2. Sunaina Mehta wife of Umesh Mehta.

Both resident of village- Karhagola, P.O. & Police Station- Katihar, District - Katihar.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.N.Kunwar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2.

20-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Pradeep Narain Kunwar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Two petitioners, who are father-in-law and mother-inlaw of the informant, apprehending their arrest in connection with Munger Mahila P.S. Case No. 11/2014 registered for the offence under Sections 498A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that the son of petitioners had earlier filed a divorce case, vide Annexure '2' to the present petition, in the Tishazari court, New Delhi and only thereafter, the informant has filed the present F.I.R. and in the said F.I.R., entire family members have

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37233 of 2014 (2) dt.20-02-2015 2/2 been implicated as accused.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that husband of the informant has filed an anticipatory bail petition, which is pending before the court below.

Keeping in view the fact that petitioners are father-inlaw and mother-in-law respectively of the informant and nature of accusation, let both the petitioners, namely; Umesh Mehta and Sunaina Mehta, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today be enlarged on anticipatory 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 Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Munger Mahila P.S. Case No. 11 of 2014 subject to condition laid down in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly; keeping in view the fact that petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the informant, they have been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay/- U T