Udaychand Yadav And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45279 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2016 Thana- MADHEPURA COMPALINT CASE District- Madhepura ======================================================

1. Udaychand Yadav son of Lalhai Yadav

2. Kumiya Devi wife of Udaychand Yadav

3. Suryakant Ravi

4. Chandrakant Shashi, both sons of Udaychand Yadav

5. Guriya Devi wife of Chandrakant Shashi, all residents of Rajani Goth, P.S. Murliganj, District Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. State Of Bihar

2. Nitu Kumari wife of Indrakant Ravi, daughter of Shri Awadh Kishore Yadav, resident of village Rajani Goth, P.S. Murliganj, District Madhepura, present resident of village + P.S. Puraini, District Madhepura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 406, 498A, 307, 379, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture and assault upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45279 of 2017(2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. 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.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Madhepura in connection with Complaint case No.35C of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T