Rounak Khatoon @ Rounak Parvena v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82665 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-374 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Rounak Khatoon @ Rounak Parvena D/o- Md. Mokhtar Resident of VillageMahua Mukundpur PS- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali 2.
Md. Mokhtar S/o- Basir Miya Resident of Village- Mahua Mukundpur PSMahua, Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Safina Khatoon W/o- Md. Firoz Village- Girbara Po-Rashulpur Fateh PsMahua Dist- Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-06-2025 No one appeared on behalf of the informant despite valid service of notice.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Mahua P.S. Case No. 374 of 2023, dated 18.06.2023 disclosing offences under Sections 363, 366(A), 34, 498(A), 342, 307/34 of the I.P.C and Sec. 3/4 of the D.P. Act.
4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the complainant's daughter was solemnized with co-accused Shamshad on 20.08.2022. After marriage, the petitioners along
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82665 of 2024(4) dt.09-06-2025 2/3 with other co-accused persons started demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- as dowry and due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand, the informant's daughter was subjected to mental and physical torture.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner no. 1 is married nanad of the informant's daughter who resides separately in her matrimonial house and petitioner no. 2 is the father-in-law of the informant's daughter. It is further submitted that entire family members have been made accused in the present case. It is also submitted that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature and the allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioners is false and fabricated. It is also submitted that there is inordinate delay of five months in lodging the Complaint-cum-FIR as the occurrence took place on 14.08.2022, complaint has been filed on 25.01.2023 and FIR has been lodged on 18.06.2023.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
7. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties concerned and taking into consideration the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82665 of 2024(4) dt.09-06-2025 3/3 nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner no. 1 is married nanad and petitioner no. 2 is the father-in-law, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 374 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) priyanka/- U T