Kawita Kumari @ Kawita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70633 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.
Kawita Kumari @ Kawita Devi Wife of Pratap Kumar Verma (mother-inlaw of the Victim - Informant) Resident Of Village- Shekhpura, (Mathurapur), P.S. - Khagaria Mufasil, District - Khagaria 2.
Pratap Kumar Verma, Son of Late Dhaneshwar Mandal (father-in-law of the Victim - Informant) Resident of Village - Shekhpura, (Mathurapur), P.S. - Khagaria Mufasil, District - Khagaria 3.
Rahul Raj, Son of Pratab Kumar Verma @ Pratap Kumar Verma (dever-inlaw of the Victim - Informant) Resident of Village- Shekhpura, (Mathurapur), P.S. - Khagaria Mufasil, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manohar Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-11-2023 Heard Mr. Manohar Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending theirs arrest in connection with Naugachiya (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 31 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 494, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The marriage of the son of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 was solemnized with the informant on 12.05.2023, however,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70633 of 2023(2) dt.09-11-2023 2/3 soon after the marriage she was subjected to demand of dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was tortured in various ways and lastly she was ousted from the matrimonial house, resulting into lodging of the present F.I.R.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the present F.I.R. is out and out a false and concocted. In fact, prior to the institution of the present case, the son of petitioner nos. 1 and 2, was abducted by Rupesh Ranjan, Daulat Devi and Mamta Devi for the purposes of marriage and since then he is trace less, for which an F.I.R., being Khagaria (Mufassil) P.S. Case No.546 of 2023 has been instituted on 01.06.2023 and the present case is nothing, but the same has been lodged in order to save their own skin. He next submitted that the petitioners are so-called parents-in-law and brother-in-law of the informant, having fair antecedent, and they undertake that they will fully cooperate in the investigation or in the proceeding of the court.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State opposes the bail application.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that prior to the institution of the present case, the petitioner no.1 instituted an F.I.R., being Khagaria (Mufassil) P.S. Case No.546 of 2023,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70633 of 2023(2) dt.09-11-2023 3/3 coupled with the fair antecedent, let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Naugachiya, Bhagalpur in connection with Naugachiya (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 31 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close relative of the petitioners. (Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U T