Prince Raj @ Prince Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63511 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Prince Raj @ Prince Ram Son of Anil Kumar Sharma R/O-Village- Rahui, PS- Rahui, Distt.- Nalanda, presently resident of Mohalla- Macchli Market Ramchandrapur, P.S.- Laheri Distt.- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Puja Kumari Wife of Prince Raj, D/O- Umakant Tiwary Resident of VillageDerhgaon, P.S.- Dawath, Distt.- Rohtas, PIN-802212 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nitee Ranjan, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP For the Complainant :
Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Raghunandan Singh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard Mr. Nitee Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State and Mr. N.K. Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the complainant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 420, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. However, later on, cognizance has been taken under Sections 504, 498(A), 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The instant case arises out of the complaint filed by the
2/4 opposite party no.2, wife of the petitioner, alleging therein that there was demand for dowry and the consequent torture upon her.
4. The matter had earlier been sent to the Patna High Court Mediation Centre for an amicable settlement of disputes between the parties, but the mediation failed.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are not correct and as a matter of fact, he has always been ready to keep his wife with due dignity and honour and it is rather the complainant who is not desirous of continuing with the matrimonial relationship. It is further submitted that the petitioner has also filed a case for restitution of conjugal life under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 21.06.2024.
6. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant and learned APP for the State, however, oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned senior counsel for the complainant stands by the allegations made in the complaint and also stated that the petitioner has cheated the complainant and taken her land which was sold and the fixed deposit was done making his mother the nominee and hence, the complainant and her son have been left in lurch.
3/4
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner makes an offer that the petitioner would make the payment of Rs.10,000.00/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) per month to the complainant in the second week of every month.
8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, 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 Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with (Rohtas) Complaint Case No. 156 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/ 482
(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023.
9. It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceedings.
10. Learned counsel for the complainant is directed to furnish the bank account details of the complainant in the learned Court below. If the complainant fails to furnish the same, the aforesaid amount will be deposited in the learned Court below which will be released in favour of the complainant
4/4 after she furnishes her bank account details. If the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid amount on two consecutive months, the complainant shall be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner.
11. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T