Md Tausif v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70573 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2021 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria ====================================================== MD TAUSIF SON OF SHAMIM SAH R/O VILLAGE- AAMGACHI, P.S.- SIKTY, DISTRICT- ARARIA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 364, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, daughter of the informant was married with this petitioner in the year 2019 and it is alleged that after passing of a few days, this petitioner and his family members started physical and mental torture and harassment for dowry. It is further alleged that after some time, the accused persons made the daughter of informant traceless and till date, she has not been recovered.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that as a matter of fact, petitioner never married with daughter of informant and while the petitioner had gone to village to meet one of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70573 of 2022(5) dt.05-07-2023 2/2 relatives, informant alongwith some other villagers met with the petitioner and forcefully took his signatures on several blank papers on gun point and prepared a forged document of Court marriage through notary public of the informant's daughter Sabbo with the petitioner and since then, informant and his associates are pressurizing the petitioner to accept his daughter as his wedded wife and after denying the same by the petitioner, the informant has falsely implicated this petitioner and his family members only with a view to extort money from the petitioner.

However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the bail petition and submits that petitioner is none else but husband of the victim lady, who is still traceless and in spite of her being traceless, neither any action was taken by this petitioner nor F.I.R. was lodged in this regard. Considering the same, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T