Mukesh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61855 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2022 Thana- KUDRA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== MUKESH KUMAR SINGH Son of Ram Dhanesh Singh Resident of Village - Pipra, P.S.- Kudra, District - Kaimur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Bihar 2.
Meena Kumari Daughter of Loknath Singh Resident of Village - Saraiya, P.O.- Umapur, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District - Kaimur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Petitioner, who is brother-in-law (Devar) of the informant is said to have ousted the informant from her matrimonial home in association of her family member over the dowry
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61855 of 2022(2) dt.01-12-2022 2/3 demand.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that in fact petitioner brother-in-law (Devar) of the informant and it appears from F.I.R. that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and he has falsely been implicated in this case on the ground that petitioner is brother-in-law of the informant. The learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Kudra P.S. Case No. 230 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61855 of 2022(2) dt.01-12-2022 3/3 fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T