Ramesh Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49642 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4058 Year- 2013 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Ramesh Kumar Mahto, Son of Ram Swaroop Mahto, Resident of Village - Lodipur, P.S. - Goraul, District - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Chandra Sahni, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. C-1-4058 of 2013 vide Trial No. 3880 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 D.P. Act As per complaint petition, the complainant Anita Raj has alleged that that she was married with petitioner on 15.06.2015 and when she went to her Sasural she was subjected to torture and cruelty in various ways due to non-fulfillment of the dowry demand of Rs. 50,000/- cash and motorcycle. Lastly on 25.06.2013 the accused persons ousted the complainant after assaulting her and keeping all her belongings. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to keep the complainant with all dignity. Further, it has been submitted that the complainant has left the house of the petitioner on her own will. That it is further submitted

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49642 of 2014 (2) dt.23-04-2015 2/2 on behalf of the petitioner that a Matrimonial Case No. 177 of 2013 dated 04.09.2013 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the restitution of the conjugal rights, has been filed by the petitioner, which is prior to the filing of the present complaint. The counsel for the State and the complainant vehemently oppose the present application.

Considering the aforesaid facts and the circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within four weeks on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. C14058 of 2013 vide Trial No. 3880 of 2014, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. It is further directed that the petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs. 2,500/- every month before the court below, which shall be released in favour of the complainant. (Sudhir Singh, J.) Vats/- U T