Patna High CourtCR. MISC./77471/2024bail granted

Md. Sahadat @ Sahadat Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2025-06-25Justice Smt. Soni Shrivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77471 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1911 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Sahadat @ Sahadat Alam S/o Md. Yushuf R/o Village- chora Perwaha, Ward No 15, Police Station- Forbesganj, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Jahana Khatun W/o Md. Sahadat, D/o Late Md. Razzak R/o Village- chora Perwaha, Ward No 15, Police Station- Forbesganj, District- Araria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kundan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP For the O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Ram Krishna Yadav, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case no.1911 of 2022 registered under sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The petitioner is the husband of opposite party no.2 and allegation against him is of demand of dowry and torture.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the matter had been sent to the Patna High Court Mediation Centre vide order dated 22.03.2025 but the mediation process has failed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77471 of 2024(4) dt.25-06-2025 2/3 submits that the allegation of demand of dowry and torture is false and concocted. The petitioner is always ready to keep his wife with full dignity and honour but it is the complainant/opposite party no.2 who never wants to live with the petitioner. He undertakes to co-operate in case/trial.

5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 who supports the allegations made in the complaint.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner makes an offer to pay Rs. 3,500/- to his wife and their child in the second week of every month for her basic requirements. It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceeding.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, it is directed that the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case no.1911 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77471 of 2024(4) dt.25-06-2025 3/3 concerned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation/trial.

8. If the opposite party no. 2 furnishes the Bank account in which the amount can be transferred and yet the petitioner fails to make the aforesaid payment of Rs. 3,500/- on two consecutive dates, the opposite party no. 2 would be at liberty to file cancellation of bail.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T