Mithlesh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73488 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2024 Thana- GHOGHARDIHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.
Mithlesh Kumar Singh Son of Late Shatrudhan Prasad Singh VillageDeodh, PS- Ghoghardiha, Dist- Madhubani 2.
Ravi Singh @ Banti @ Ravi Kumar Singh Son of Mithlesh Kumar Singh Village- Deodh, PS- Ghoghardiha, Dist- Madhubani 3.
Kiran Devi Wife of Mithlesh Kumar Singh Village- Deodh, PSGhoghardiha, Dist- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 11-11-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners in this application prays for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case no.58 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under sections 498A, 379, 341, 323,324, 354B, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per allegation in the F.I.R, the informant states that she was married to one Shashi Shankar Singh on 20.4.2018. She lived in her sasural for some time wherein accused persons including the petitioner herein started making
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73488 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 2/3 demand of Rs.15 lakhs and asking her to get the same as also golden bracelet from her father. She was tortured. Thereafter it is stated that she along with her husband started living in Chandigarh wherein everything was going on fine. On the informant returning after a few months for the marriage of her devar ie petitioner no.2 herein who got married on 26.4.2024, the accused persons once again started making demand of dowry. She states that she is pregnant and apprehends that the accused may cause injury to the unborn child.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners who are the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother- in -law of the informant have been falsely implicated in the case. From the contents of the FIR itself it would transpire that the informant was living with her husband in Chandigarh. The false implication has been as a result of differences over property dispute. Though the husband has also been made accused in the case the same is in an ornamental manner. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation in the F.I.R., the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73488 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 3/3 relationship of the petitioners being father-in-law, mother-inlaw and brother- in -law of the informant , no complaint having been levellled against the petitioners in the past and the petitioners not having any criminal antecedent, it is directed that the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case no.58 of 2024 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M.-1st Class, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T