Mukul Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65413 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2525 Year-2017 Thana- SIWAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSiwan ====================================================== Mukul Sah, Son Of Late Jagdaun Sah Resident Of Village Darjiyan Kishunpur Mohini Ps Kudhani Dist Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sujata Devi, Wife Of Ramdayal Sah, D/O Ram Ekwal Gupta Village- Lakri Dargah, Ps- Barhariya, Dist- Siwan ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate Mrs. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate Mrs. Kumari Rupa, Advocate Mrs. Anjana Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Complaint Case No. 2525 of 2017 dated 28.11.2017 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 323, 379, 498A, 506 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3/4 D.P. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the Complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- as dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65413 of 2023(2) dt.07-11-2023 2/2 general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner is neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the Complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the Complainant and he has been living separately from the husband of the Complainant. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Siwan in connection with Complainant Case No. 2525 of 2017, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T