Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74394 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar S/o Late Kedar Singh, R/o Village- Khutaha Dih, Ward No. 08, P.S.- Barhiya, Distt.- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate For the Informant :
Mr. Madan Pd. Singh No. 2, Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025 dated 19.02.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 352 and 351 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of either a car or money for a car and ousted her from her matrimonial home.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
2/4 that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant. The allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner filed a divorce case under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Principal Judge-cum-Family Court, Lakhisarai vide Divorce Case No. 18 of 2025 on 17.02.2025 and just after filing of the said divorce case, the informant with an ulterior motive has registered the instant case on 19.02.2025 only to harass the petitioner and his family members. 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."
Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498 A of the the Indian Penal Code is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another passed in Criminal Appeal No (s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023.
3/4 of the bail petition.
5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the petitioner named-above, in the event of his arrest / surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai, in connection with Lakhisarai Mahila P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, on further condition:
(i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned trial Court on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.
7. If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the
4/4 purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.
8. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Shahnawaz/- U T