Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44058/2017bail granted

Guli Mahato @Gulli Mahto v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-09-15Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44058 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -375 Year- 2016 Thana -WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== GULI MAHATO @ GULLI MAHTO, Son of Hiralal Mahato, Resident of Village- Koirgawa, Police Station- Yogapatti, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Durga Devi, Wife of Guli Mahato, Daughter of Bangali Choudhary, at present residing at Village- Paki Bawali, Bankatawa, Police StationBagaha, District- West Champaran. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Bharat Lal, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Tr. No. 1163 of 2017, arising out of Complaint Case No. 375 of 2016 for the offences instituted under Section 498(A) of the IPC.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the complainant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44058 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 2/2 present case due to petty family dispute. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has further 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.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the State that the petitioner is named in the complaint case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, 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 in connection with Complaint Case No. C375/2016 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-I, Bagaha, West Champaran, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T