Dhanawati Kunwar @ Dhanawati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67299 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1089 Year-2016 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.

Dhanawati Kunwar @ Dhanawati Devi Wife Of Late Dudhnath Pandey Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.) 2.

Akhilesh Pandey Son Of Late Dudhnath Pandey Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.) 3.

Mithilesh Pandey @ Mithilesh Son Of Late Dudhnath Pandey Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.) 4.

Bihari Pandey @ Biharilal Pandey Son Of Late Dudhnath Pandey Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.) 5.

Ramsila Devi Wife Of Shivakant Pandey Resident Of Village - Kamauli, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.), Present Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (U.P.) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Hemlata Pandey Wife Of Kamlesh Pandey, Daughter Of Late Sri Ram Upadhya Resident Of Village - Amra, Police Station - Kandawa, District - Varanasi, (u.p.) Presently Resident Of Village - Bhaganda, Police Station - Chainpur, District - Kaimur, Bhabhua.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Roy For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehends arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67299 of 2023(2) dt.19-10-2023 2/3

3. It is alleged that these petitioners along with other ? F.I.R. named co-accused persons committed torture and harassment to the complainant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Petitioner no. 1 is mother-in-law, petitioner nos. 2, 3 and 4 are brother-in-law and petitioner no. 5 is married sisterin-law of the complainant. Thrust of accusation is against husband of the complainant. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioners are separate in mess and property and have got no concern with family affairs of the informant. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the bail application.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail application is allowed. Let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st , Kaimur at Bhabhua in connection with Complaint Case No. 1089 of 2016, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67299 of 2023(2) dt.19-10-2023 3/3 Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T