Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18054/2017dfd for non appearance

Munir Ansari v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-07-19Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18054 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -162 Year- 2016 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Munir Ansari, S/o Manuwar Ansari, reident of Village- Bhausaula, P.S.- Darihat, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sairun Khatoon, W/o Munir Ansari, D/o Late Idrish Ansari, resident of Village- Sotwan, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest for the offence instituted under Sections 498(A), 341 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

. The allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18054 of 2017 (3) dt.12-10-2017 2/2 petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The case is triable by the Magistrate. Due to petty family dispute, the present case has been instituted against the petitioner. The petitioner has further relied upon the judgment of this court, in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

On behalf of the State and the counsel for the Opposite Party No.2, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the Complaint Case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No.162 of 2016 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-V, Sasaram at Rohtas subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Amit/- U T