Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64795 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-328 Year-2014 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad ====================================================== PRAMOD KUMAR S/o Virendra Saw R/v- Dumari Chatti, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Moni Kumari, wife of Pramod Kumar, D/o-Ramchandra Prasad, resident of village Khariyawan, P.S. Madanpur, District Aurangabad. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Mukul Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rana Randhir Singh Mr. Neerad Parashar Mr. Aniket Kumar Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379, 504 & 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no2., is said to have ousted the opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial home in association of his family members over the dowry demand.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64795 of 2022(4) dt.09-01-2024 2/3 no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further stated that the marriage was solemnized on 18.04.2008 and the complaint case has been lodged in the year 2014 after six years of marriage. It is further submitted that a compromise was entered into between the parties and in the year 2017, the petitioner registered a land in the name of his son. It is further submitted that the opposite party no.2 is in habit of filing cases against the petitioner only with an intent to harass and torture him. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that there is direction of the Family Court to pay Rs.4000/- per month to her but the petitioner is not paying the same.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64795 of 2022(4) dt.09-01-2024 3/3 below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 328 of 2014, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. Opposite party no.2 is directed to take legal recourse, as she may be advised, for execution of the order passed by the Family Court.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T