Md. Jasim v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65886 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-178 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur ====================================================== MD. JASIM Son of Md. Kabir Resident of Village - Udapatti, P.O. - Bathua, P.S. - Musrigharari, District - Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Wahida Khatoon Wife of Md. Jasim Resident of Village - Udapatti, P.S. - Musrigharari, District - Samastipur, At present daughter of Md. Saukat Ali, Resident of Village - Chajado Tola, Tenda, P.O. - Dargah Bela, P.S.- Baligau, District - Vaishali, Mobile No.- 7360896165.

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mrs. Asha Devi, APP For O.P. No.2 :

Md. Hussamuddin Azad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.178 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sections 3/4 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner, who is husband of O.P. No.2, and other co-accused persons are said to have tortured O.P. No.2 physically and mentally for non-fulfillment of demand of additional dowry.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65886 of 2022(3) dt.18-05-2023 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that O.P. No.2 has solemnized second marriage with another person, therefore, the petitioner is not ready to keep O.P. No.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of O.P. No.2 submits that O.P. No.2 has not solemnized second marriage. Taking into consideration the fact that till date petitioner is the husband of O.P. No.2, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T