Munshi Thakur v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54880 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -814 Year- 2014 Thana -SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSAMASTIPUR ====================================================== Munshi Thakur, Son of Late Hargovind Thakur, Resident of MohallaBadi Durga Sthan, Post office + Police Station- Mahgama, District- Godda (Jharkhand).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Rabina Devi Wife of Munshi Thakur Resident of Mohalla- Badi Durga Sthan, Post Office + Police Station- Mahgama, District- Godda (Jharkhand) at present daughter of Prem Prakash Thakur, Resident of Mohalla- Naik Toli, Ward No. 2 Andar Town + Post Office- Police Station- Rosera, District- Samastipur.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gopesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2017 Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2. Let it be kept on the record. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.P.P. for the State as also the learned counsel for the Complainant.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with C.R. No. 814 of 2014/ T.R. No. 2075 of 2016 for the offences punishable under sections 498 (A), 323, 379 and 34 of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54880 of 2016 (7) dt.21-04-2017 2/3 The complainant was married with the petitioner on 13.11.2009 in Manokamana Temple, Bhagalpur and after the marriage the complainant was living some time with the petitioner peacefully but thereafter the accused persons including the petitioner started demanding motorcycle and one colour T.V. by way of dowry and due to non fulfillment she was being tortured and assaulted and ultimately she was brutally assaulted and ousted from the in-laws house resulting the complainant is residing in her Maike.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner was/is always ready to keep the complainant as his wife but the complainant is not ready to live with the petitioner, the complaint petition has been filed with false allegation, there is no demand of dowry, the marriage was performed in a temple, nothing was taken or given at the time of marriage and all the allegations have been alleged falsely, against the petitioner there is no specific allegation and the specific allegation is against the Bhaisur and Gotni who have already been allowed bail and as such the petitioner also deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. duly assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner is the husband and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54880 of 2016 (7) dt.21-04-2017 3/3 he is responsible for all the acts.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Rosera, District- Samastipur.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T