Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59469 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-812 Year-2021 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar, Son of Ranjeet Singh, Resident of VillageItadhi, P.S. Bhabua (O.P. Sonhan), District.- Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sandhya Kumari D/O- Parsuram Singh R/V- Village- Itadhi, P.S.- Bhabua (O.P. Sonhan), District - Kaimur at Bhabua at present address VillagePadari, Post- Padari, P.S.- Shivsagar, District.- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 19-09-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Rohtas Complaint Case no. 812 of 2021, registered under sections 498A, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant states that she was married to the petitioner on 26.4.2019 and various articles by way of gift etc., as given in detail in the complaint, were given. A daughter was born out of the said wedlock. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59469 of 2024(2) dt.19-09-2024 2/3 further stated that the accused persons tortured her for demand of dowry and on 16.5.2021 she was forced out of the house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be husband of the complainant. The allegations are false and concocted. Referring to Annexure-2 to the petition it is submitted that it was after filing of the divorce case on 30.9.2021, which was registered as Matrimonial Case no.1515 of 2021, in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi that the instant complaint with false and incorrect allegations was filed on 25.11.2021. The petitioner is ready to cooperate in the learned Court below.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the submissions made especially the filing of the complaint case after filing of the divorce case by the petitioner herein and in the facts and circumstances of the case it is directed that the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Rohtas Complaint Case no. 812 of 2021 on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59469 of 2024(2) dt.19-09-2024 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T