Matuk Rai v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2242 of 2017 (3) dt.21-06-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2242 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -688 Year- 2012 Thana -SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSARAN ====================================================== Matuk Rai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

State of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 21-06-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Complaint Case No. 688 of 2012, disclosing offences under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and no specific overt act is attributed to him. In fact, the petitioner happens to be the husband of the informant is still ready to keep the informant as wife but the informant herself does not want to live with the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2242 of 2017 (3) dt.21-06-2017 the prayer for bail of this petitioner and submitted that there is allegation of demand of dowry and non fulfillment of the same the informant subjected to torture and assault and has been ousted from her matrimonial home by petitioner-husband. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T