Md. Aftab @ Raju v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36275 of 2014 (3) dt.09-04-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36275 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -122 Year- 2014 Thana -LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY DistrictDARBHANGA ======================================================

1. Md. Aftab @ Raju, son of Late Md. Mobarak , Resident of Village/ Mohalla - Diwana Takia, railway colony , Police Station - Lalit Narayan Mithila University Compus Darbhanga , District - Darbhanga . .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sabiha Praveen , Wife of Md. Aftab and Saughter of Late Abdul Sattar , Presently , Presently , residing a Village -Bardaha , Police Station - Patauna , District - Madhubani .

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. G.S.Gupta(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with L.N.M.U. P.S. Case No. 122 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant was married with the petitioner in the year 2011 and allegedly, due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 6,000/- the petitioner assaulted her and she was ousted from the in-laws house. She gave birth to a female child from the wedlock and on the basis of compromise she went to her in-laws house but

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36275 of 2014 (3) dt.09-04-2015 again demand was made of Rs. 1,00,000/- and the petitioner and other family members tried to kill her, then she came to her naihar. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is ready to keep the informant but she herself left her Sasural and she is not ready to live with petitioner and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP opposes.

Considering that the petitioner is the husband and there is specific allegation against him for demanding dowry and torture, this Court is not persuaded to grant the privilege of prearrest bail to the petitioner, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

However, in case and if so advised, the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail before the court below, then his prayer for bail shall be considered on its own merit on the same day without being prejudiced by the present order. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T