Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73791 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Suraj Kumar Son of Kishore Sharma R/O Vil.- Wagverda, New Basti Behind Sindhu Kanu Field Guradwara, P.S.- Wagverda ,Dist.- Singhbhumu, Jharkhand.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Puja Kumari Wife of Suraj Kumar, D/O Arun Sharma Present Address Laheria Tola, Kajee Chak Barh, P.S.- Barh, Dist.- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kameshwar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Complaint Case No. 121(c) of 2022 registered for the offence/s punishable u/s 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the complainant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 4,00,000/- as dowry.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73791 of 2024(2) dt.23-10-2024 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the husband of the complainant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the complainant. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel for 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." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the allegation being general and omnibus, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73791 of 2024(2) dt.23-10-2024 3/3 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Patna in connection with Complaint Case No. 121(c) of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T