Sulendra Sahu @ Surendra Saw v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67238 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2022 Thana- DELHA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Sulendra Sahu @ Surendra Saw Son of Munshi Sao 2.
Anueadha Devi Wife of Sulendra Sahu @ Surendra Saw 3.
Akash Sahu @ Akash Kumar Son of Sulendra Sahu All are resident of Village - Barki Delha, Paraiya Road, Near Ram Mandir, P.S. - Delha, District - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Nisha Gupta Wife of Prakash Shahu @ Prakash Kumar Resident of Village - Barki Delha, Paraiya Road, Near Ram Mandir, P.S. - Delha, District - Gaya. At present D/o. Ashok Kumar, 59/E/5 Dagoli, P.S. - Dutiya Dagoli Govind Nagar, District - Kanpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Praveen Kumar Ms. Anju Kumari Sinha For the State :
Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad For the informant :
Mr. Ram Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 22-10-2024
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Delha Police Station Case No. 237 of 2022, dated 22.07.2022, disclosing offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the marriage of the Opposite Party No. 2-informant was solemnized with co-accused Prakash Sahu on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67238 of 2024(2) dt.22-10-2024 2/3 30.06.2020 and in the marriage, the father of the Opposite Party No. 2 had given Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash and ornaments of Rs. 2,00,000/-. It has been alleged that soon after the marriage, the petitioners, along with other coaccused, petitioner, used to demand dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the said demand, they used to torture the Opposite Party No. 2, physically as well as mentally and the accused persons have also kept the five-months old child of the Opposite Party No. 2 with them.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any offfence in the manner alleged and they have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner no. 1 is the father-in-law, petitioner no. 2 is the mother-in-law and the petitioner no. 3 is the brother-in-law (dewar) of the Opposite Party No. 2. He further submits that the petitioners have never demanded dowry from the Opposite Party No. 2 and/or his father and the Opposite Party No. 2 has left the house out of her own will. He next submits that there is no specific overt act alleged against the petitioners and the allegations levelled in the First Information Report is general and omnibus in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67238 of 2024(2) dt.22-10-2024 3/3 nature.
5. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation levelled in the First Information Report and the fact that the petitioners are the father-in-law, mother-inlaw and brother-in-law (dewar) of the Opposite Party No. 2 and there is general and omnibus allegation against them, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya, in connection with Delha Police Station Case No. 237 of 2022, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √