Md. Jamil And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44932 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -59 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA P.S District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Md. Jamil, Son of Late Fushruddin,

2. Md. Sojabid @ Md. Subahid @ Dablu,

3. Md. Ibrar,

4. Md. Mustak. All are sons of Md. Jamil,

5. Sanjida Khatun,

6. Tabbasum Khatun @ Basiya,

7. Asma Khatun, are D/o Md. Jamil,

8. Shabana Khatun W/o Md. Ibrar, Are R/o Village- Ayraji Kuseher, P.S.- Balua Bazar, District- Supaul.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Arun, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending his arrest in connection with Supaul Mahila P.S. Case No. 59/17 for the offences instituted under Sections 498(A), 341, 323, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D. P. Act.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioners tortured the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44932 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. They have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioners are inlaws of the informant. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the informant. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners have further relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the State that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named, be released on bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Supaul Mahila P.S. Case No. 59/17 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M. Birpur, (Supaul), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T