Ramesh Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61762 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2021 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Supaul ====================================================== Ramesh Choudhary Son Of Vuishwnath Choudhary Resident Of VillageSihe, Ps And Distt- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sita Devi Wife Of Ramesh Choudhary Resident Of Village- Sihe, Ps And Distt- Supaul At Present D/O Asarfi Choudhary, Residing At Chandpipar, Ps- Kishanpur, Distt-Supaul ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP For the Informant :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 07-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. No one appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2. Even yesterday, no one appears on her behalf when the matter is called out.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case no.69C of 2021 registered under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case is one under Section 498A and petitioner is the husband. The allegation against the petitioner is of demand of dowry and torture.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the matter had been sent to the Patna High Court Mediation Centre vide order dated 02.04.2025 but the mediation process has failed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the allegation of demand of dowry and torture is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61762 of 2023(6) dt.07-08-2025 2/2 false and concocted. The petitioner is always ready to keep his wife with full dignity and honour but it is the complainant who never wants to live with the petitioner. He further submits that opposite party no.2 is staying in his native village for the past 16 years and has still filed the present case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to co-operate in case/trial.

5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts 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 Complaint Case no.69C of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T