Md. Sadam Hussain v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.28225 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -265 Year- 2016 Thana -JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE DistrictJEHANABAD ====================================================== Md. Sadam Hussain Son of Md. Sultan, resident of Village- Dumra, P.S.- Chandouti, District- Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Seema Sawa, Daughter of Md. Wazir resident of Village- Dumra, P.S.- Chandouti, District- Gaya. At Present Residing at Village- Garedia Khurd, P.S.+ District- Jehanabad, Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 07-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the complainant.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379 and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that, as per the complaint petition, the petitioner has forced and coerced her to marry him. It is also stated in the complaint petition that they had married before the Notary by signing affidavit which cannot be treated as a marriage. It is further stated that 15 days earlier, First Information Report was lodged by her against the family members of this petitioner in which she has stated she loves the petitioner and she wants to marry him but the father of the petitioner is not
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28225 of 2017 (2) dt.07-07-2017 2/2 allowing that. It is contended that there is much variation in the statement made by her in the FIR and in the present complaint case which was lodged 15 days later. It is urged that from the FIR and the complaint petition, it is writ large that there is no legal marriage between the petitioner and the complainant and if there was any physical relationship that was on consent of the complainant.
Learned counsel appearing for the informant has stated that ordinarily girl will never disclosed anything in the manner which has been disclosed, therefore, it should be considered as true.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above-named, be released on bail in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No.265 of 2016, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand Rupees) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad subject to the conditions as laid down under sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) V.K. Pandey/- U T