Neeraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63312 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas ====================================================== Neeraj Kumar Son of Late Rameshwar Chandravanshi R/o VillageBhartiganj, P.S.- Sasaram (Town), District- Rohtas, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Anjali Kumari D/O Arun Chandravanshi R/O Vill.- Jamuhara, P.S.- Tilouthu, Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 21-09-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 25 of 2023, registered under sections 498A, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that she was married to the petitioner on 11.5.2018. After sometime of the marriage, the accused persons started making a demand of Rs. 1 lakh by way of dowry and also started to assault her. She was ousted from her matrimonial house. She had two sons from the said wedlock. The accused persons forcibly retained her articles as also kept her one son with them.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. It is the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63312 of 2024(2) dt.21-09-2024 2/2 informant who is not ready to live with the petitioner. Referring to the contents of the F.I.R., it is submitted that besides the same being typed, the occurrence mentioned therein are with respect to the year 2018 or for which no date of occurrence is mentioned. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

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

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. together with the petitioner not having any criminal antecedent, 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 Mahila P.S. Case No. 25 of 2023 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 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Ranjeet/- U T