Amarjeet Kumar Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71777 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== Amarjeet Kumar Manjhi Son of Hiralal Manjhi Resident of Mohalla- Purani Gurhatti, P.S.- Town, Distt.- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Satya Kumari Wife of Amarjeet Kumar Mannhi Resident of VillageChaturpur, Post- Gopalpur, PS- Nayagaon, District- Saran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subodh Kumar Barnwal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. By an earlier order, the matter had been sent to the Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre for resolution of disputes between the parties but the same has also failed.

4. The prosecution case is based upon an FIR lodged by the opposite party no. 2 in which she has made an allegation of demand of dowry and torture. Petitioner is the husband of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71777 of 2024(7) dt.15-05-2025 2/3 opposite party no.2.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are not correct and as a matter of fact, the petitioner had also lodged a criminal case against the informant and others bearing Saran Town P.S. Case No. 466 of 2023 under Sections 323, 379 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that the petitioner had always been ready to keep the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour while the opposite party no. 2 herself is not ready to reside in the matrimonial house.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, however, controverts the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and rather supports the allegations made in the FIR.

7. At this stage, the petitioner offers to give Rs.4000/- (rupees four thousand) per month to opposite party no.2 in the first week of every month. It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceeding.

8. In such view of the matter, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71777 of 2024(7) dt.15-05-2025 3/3 surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahila Saran P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation/trial.

9. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, under instruction, submits that the opposite party no.2 undertakes to provide her bank account details to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today. If the opposite party no.2 furnishes the bank account in which the amount can be transferred, and yet the petitioner fails to give the aforesaid amount on two consecutive dates to opposite party no.2, the opposite party no.2 would be at liberty to file cancellation of bail.

10. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T