Munchun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56354 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- SANDESH District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Munchun Kumar S/O Mahendra Prasad R/O Village- Akhgaon, P..S.- Sandesh, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Vijay Kumar S/O Ramchandra Prasad R/O Village- Kesath, P..S.- Nawanagar, District- Buxar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Diwakar, Adv Mr. Sonu Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Sandesh P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025 registered for the offence/s punishable u/s 498A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the other co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant's daughter mentally and physically due to nonfulfillment of demand of Rs. 20,00,000/- as dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56354 of 2025(3) dt.04-11-2025 2/3 this case. The petitioner is the husband of the informant's daughter. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant's daughter. 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 no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56354 of 2025(3) dt.04-11-2025 3/3 twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Sandesh P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharitya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.), with further condition/s:- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

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) Jyoti/- U T