Meena Kunwar @ Meena Devi And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.11961 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -74 Year- 2016 Thana -ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
1. Meena Kunwar @ Meena Devi, W/o Late Munilal Gupta,
2. Malti Kunwar @ Malti Devi, W/o Late Ashok Gupta,
3. Binod Gupta @ Binod Kumar Gupta, S/o Ashok Gupta,
4. Rajendra Prasad @ Rajendra Pd. Gupta, S/o Late Muni Lal Gupta,
5. Archna Devi, W/o Rajendra Prasad, All are resident of Village- Bokaro, Prabhat Colony, P.S.- Bokaro, Dist- Bokaro, State- Jharkhand. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Seema Devi, Wife of Sunil Prasad, Resident of Village- Bokaro, Prabhat Colony, Chas Bokaro, P.S.- Bokaro, Dist- Bokaro (Jharkhand). at present Village- Nashriganj, P.S.- Nashriganj, Dist- Rohtas. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Nath Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar - 1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case for the offence registered under Section 498(A) of the IPC. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioners tortured the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11961 of 2018 (2) dt.05-03-2018 2/2 against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners are in-laws of the victim. They are separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. The petitioners have further 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.
On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and opposite party no. 2, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory 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. Vikramganj, Rohtas, in connection with Complaint Case No. 74 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T