Sipahi Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68489 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1701 Year-2020 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== SIPAHI SINGH Son of Late Fulena Singh Resident of village - Manopali, P.S.- Sahajitpur, District - Saran. At Present residing at M.O.C.P. Colony, Near Durga Mandir, P.S.- Tisra, District - Dhanbad (Jharkhand). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Baby Devi Daughter of Late Ramkripal Singh Resident of Village - Prabejabad, P.S.- Sonepur, District - Saran.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajendra Kumar Jain For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Asha Kumari For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 494, 325, 467, 468 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
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 the petitioner is an innocent person and has committed no offence. Petitioner has neither made any dowry
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68489 of 2022(9) dt.21-08-2023 2/3 demand nor drove her out of her matrimonial home nor tormented her over the demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the petitioner had never performed marriage with the opposite party no.2 rather his marriage was performed with Kumari Bebi @ Bebi Devi on 16.04.1990. It is further submitted that the petitioner has documentary proof to establish the fact that the opposite party no.2 is making fake claim and she has no concern with the family of the petitioner. The petitioner has 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.
5. In that view of the matter, 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 below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No.1701/2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.,
6. Petitioner is ready to pay Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68489 of 2022(9) dt.21-08-2023 3/3 Thousand) per month to opposite party no.2 in the second week of every month for a period of one year. If the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid amount on two consecutive months, opposite party no.2 shall be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner.
7. It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceedings.
8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is directed to make available the bank account details of opposite party no.2 in the learned Court below.
9. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the learned Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Center for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.
10. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T