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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55958 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2018 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== SAROJ SINGH @ SAROJ KUMAR SINGH, Male, aged about 30 years, Son of Late Jag Narayan Singh, Resident of Village - Gopi Bigha, P.S - Dehri, Distt - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar.

2.

Prem Lata Devi, D/o Jagdish Singh, Resident of Village - Gopi Bigha, P.Oand Post - Dehri - on - Sone, Distt - Rohtas. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Anjani Kumar Jha, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner was granted provisional anticipatory bail in a case for the offence registered under Sections 323, 341, 498(A) and 406/34 of the IPC in which cognizance has been taken under Section 498(A) of the IPC.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55958 of 2019(4) dt.16-11-2019 2/2 There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner is the husband of the victim. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has further 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.

On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and the informant, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R./Complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner, vide order dated 03.09.2019, is hereby confirmed.

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.

(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T