Raghunath Sah v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46552 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -273 Year- 2016 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Raghunath Sah, Son of Kedar Sah, resident of Village Bisopur, P.O. Khanethi, P.S: Kargahar, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Soni Devi, Wife of Raghunath Sah, D/o sri Ram Sah, Resident of Village: Bisopur, P.S: Khanethi, P.S. Kargahar (Barahari), DistrictRohtas, at present resident of Village + P.O: Dhotiyakala, P.S.: Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Bansh Dubey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 273 of 2016, registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that the marriage of the complainant was performed with one Raghubansh Sah, elder brother of the petitioner, on 21.04.2005 and there are two children due to their wedlock. The husband in the informant used to do work at contract in Mumbai and he died on 03.05.2014. At that time, Rs. Five lakhs was paid by the company under which her husband was doing the work of contract. Thereafter, her father-in-law, mother-in-law asked to give the said amount to this petitioner on assurance that her re-marriage will be

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46552 of 2017 (2) dt.22-09-2017 2/2 performed with this petitioner and accordingly, her remarriage was also performed with this petitioner. It is alleged that petitioner has got job in Railway department in the year 2015 then all her in-laws demanded Rs. Five lakhs from the complainant and in case of nonfulfillment of the demand they will solemnize second marriage of the petitioner and thereafter, she was removed along with her children snatching her personnel belongings.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the death of Raghubansh Sah, brother of the petitioner, the petitioner was with the complainant/O.P. No.2 and O.P.No.2 tried to pressurized him to perform remarriage with the petitioner, when family members were not ready to perform the marriage of the complainant/O.P. No.2 with this petitioner then she filed this false case only to give pressure. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M. Sasaram (Rohtas) in connection with Complaint Case No. 273 of 2016, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T