Patna High CourtCR. MISC./82810/2024bail granted

Md. Tabrez @ Tabrez v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-15Justice Smt. Soni Shrivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82810 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-906 Year-2022 Thana- DARBHANGA COMPLAINT CASE District- Darbhanga ====================================================== MD. TABREZ @ TABREZ SON OF ANWAR R/O VILL.- GENAUR, P.S.- BISFY, (PATONA O.P.) DISTRICT- MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Nargis Khatun Wife of Tabrez, D/O Md. Motiur Rahman R/O Vill.- Ramoul, P.S.- Kamtaul, Dist.- Darbhanga.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akbar Ali, APP For the O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Kedar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025

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 Darbhanga Complaint Case no.906 of 2022 registered under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

3. The case is one under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and petitioner is the husband. The 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 30.04.2025 but the mediation process has failed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that marriage is of the year 2015 and at the time of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82810 of 2024(8) dt.15-07-2025 2/3 marriage the petitioner was unaware of the fact that complainant/opposite party no.2 was already a married woman and whose earlier marriage had also failed. It is further pointed out that the complainant/opposite party no.2 had also filed complaint case against her second husband under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. It is also a fact that opposite party no.2, after some time of marriage, has been staying in her maiyka and hence, there has been no relationship of husband and wife between them and there had been no occasion to inflict any kind of torture and cruelty upon her. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and 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 submits that opposite party no.2 is a destitute lady who has been left in lurch by the present petitioner and she has no source of income in order to meet her own expense. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that opposite party no.2 has been staying on her own maiyka since 2015 and has been able to sustain herself in all these years.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner makes an offer to pay Rs. 1,500/- to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82810 of 2024(8) dt.15-07-2025 3/3 his wife 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 Darbhanga Complaint Case no.906 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 learned Court below, 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. 1,500/- on two consecutive dates, the opposite party no. 2 would be at liberty to file cancellation of bail.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T