Tapeshwar Sahani And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18012 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -154 Year- 2010 Thana -AHIAPUR District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================
1. Tapeshwar Sahani, son of Late Dukhharam Sahani,
2. Ranjay Kumar Sahani @ Ranjan Sahani,
3. Sanjay Sahani,
4. Ashok Sahani, All 2 to 4 are sons of Tapeshwar Sahani, All resident of Village- Telghara, P.S.- Sarai, Dist- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 02-05-2017 The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ahiapur P.S. Case No. 154 of 2010, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Allegation against the petitioners is that they have taken money from the complainant as a demand of dowry on the pretext of marriage of petitioner no. 3 with the daughter of the complainant but he has not solemnized marriage with her. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the occurrence as alleged is of the year 2010 and petitioner no. 3 and daughter of the complainant are married now and they are living their lives separately.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18012 of 2017 (2) dt.02-05-2017 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Having heard both sides, in view of the fact that the case is of the year 2010 and petitioners have come for grant of anticipatory bail after six years, as such, considering the conduct of the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant them the privilege of bail, their application for grant of anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.
Let petitioners surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail and if any such application is filed, the court below after considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, shall pass an appropriate order, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
With the above observation, this application is disposed of.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T