Ainul Haque And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.6793 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1201 Year- 2013 Thana -NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE DistrictNAWADA ======================================================
1. Ainul Haque son of late Jahuruddin
2. Alim Uddin son of Ainul Haque Both are Resident of Village- Baniya Bigha, Police Station Govindpur in the district of Nawada. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Maniruddin Son of Abdul latif Marhun Resident of Village=-Anaila, Police Station Roh in the District of Nawada. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-02-2016 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a complaint case wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case is that the complainant's son Maksood Ansari was married with Nusrat Praveen, the daughter of petitioner no.1 but after the birth of two children, the relationship between them got strained when the daughter of the petitioner no.1 filed Complaint Case No. 1446 of 2009 levelling accusation under Sections 498A of the IPC. Subsequently on 25.02.2011, the son of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6793 of 2016 (2) dt.15-02-2016 2/3 the complainant went to his in-laws house and stayed there and thereafter he was being abducted for extortion demand of `50,000/- leading to registration of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2011.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on conclusion of investigation, the final form was submitted and investigating agency recommended for prosecution of the complainant under Sections 182 and 211 of the IPC, thereafter on protest order of cognizance was passed on 08.06.2015. The petitioners are father-in-law and brother-in-law (Sala) of the victim. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that due to strained relationship between the parties, the accusation has been levelled and accusation has not been found true during investigation.
Considering the relationship between the complainant and the petitioners and the fact that during investigation the police did not find the case true against the petitioners, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of `10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., Nawada in connection with
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6793 of 2016 (2) dt.15-02-2016 3/3 Complaint Case No. 1201 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Amrendra/- U T