Rajan Kumar Singh @ Rajan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62794 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1457 Year-2021 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== Rajan Kumar Singh @ Rajan Kumar Son of Ram Ganesh Singh Resident of Village - Dhram-ganj, Ward No.- 11, Police Station - Kishanganj, District - Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Khushboo Kumari Wife of Rajan Kumar Singh Daughter of Ram Narayan Singh, Resident of Village - Dhramganj, Ward No.- 11, Police Station - Kishanganj, District - Kishanganj. At present Village - Nirala Nagar, Ratanpur, Ward No.- 21, Police Statin - (Nagar) Ratanpur O.P., District - Begusarai.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 05-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint Case No. 1457(C) of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354(B), 498(A), 341, 354, 509 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no2., is said to have ousted the opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial home in association of his family members over

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62794 of 2024(2) dt.05-10-2024 2/2 the dowry demand.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioner and his family members have never demanded any dowry from the O.P. No. 2. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the learned Trial Court has issued the process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner on 16.05.2023 itself.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has already been issued against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T