Md. Jahid v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67676 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur ====================================================== Md. Jahid Son of Md. Lalbabu Resident of Village - Mohammadpur Quari, P.S. - Waini (OP), District - Samastipur (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shabnam Khatun @ Sabnam Wife of Md. Jahid Resident of Village - Mohammadpur Quari, P.S. - Waini (OP), District - Samastipur. Present address - Shabnam Khatun @ Sabnam, D/o. Md. Munna, Resident of Village and P.O. - Darashpur, P.S. - Warishnagar, District - Samastipur (Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-03-2025 In pursuance to the earlier order dated 14.02.2025, both parties appeared in Chambers proceeding.

2. Heard the parties.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 171 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 313 498A of the I.P.C. and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. It is a case of matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and opposite party no. 2. Petitioner - Md. Jahid is the husband of opposite party no. 2 - Shabnam Khatun

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67676 of 2024(4) dt.18-03-2025 2/3 (complainant). Allegation against the petitioner and his family members is of torturing and assaulting the informant due to nonfulfillment of dowry demand.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent, committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner for dowry demand and torture. Petitioner has never demanded any dowry from the complainant and for that never tortured her. He further submits that petitioner is a daily wage labourer and he is ready to keep his wife with full honour and dignity.

6. During course of argument learned counsel for both the parties submits that petitioner and opposite party no. 2 (complainant) are now living together and leading their conjugal life happily and now there is no dispute between them.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, let the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt/production of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Samastipur in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67676 of 2024(4) dt.18-03-2025 3/3 connection with Complaint Case No. 171 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (S. B. Pd. Singh, J) prabhakar/- U T