Sk. Jamshed v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56080 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2025 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== SK. Jamshed S/O Sk. Salim Resident of Village- Nasir tola Bairea @ Nasi Tola Bairea, P.S.- Amdabad, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar BIHAR 2.
Sahenoor Khatoon D/O Sk. Manglu Resident of Village- Naya Tola Gobindpur, P.S.- Amdabad, District- Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Md. Musowir For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal For the Informant :
Mr. Sanjeev Kr Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 22 of 2025 dated 02.02.2025 registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 126(2), 115(2), 110, 85, 352, 351(2), 351(3) read with section 3(5) of the BNS and section 3⁄4 of the DP Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56080 of 2025(3) dt.04-11-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the husband of the informant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel for 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." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has two criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner. It is further stated that the matter was referred to the mediation centre to settle the dispute, but as per the mediation report dated 19.09.2025, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56080 of 2025(3) dt.04-11-2025 3/3 dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the allegation being general and omnibus, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Katihari in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 22 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T