Pramod Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69753 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2019 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== 1.
PRAMOD CHAUHAN Son of Late Krishna Chouhan Resident of VillageDeurwa, Gatti Tola, Bazari Tola, Sangwadih, P.S-Gopalpur, DistrictGopalganj. 2.
Raj Kumar Chouhan Son of Late Fulena Mahto Resident of Village-Deurwa, Gatti Tola, Bazari Tola, Sangwadih, P.S-Gopalpur, District-Gopalganj. 3.
Sudama Prasad Son of Late Fulena Mahto Resident of Village-Deurwa, Gatti Tola, Bazari Tola, Sangwadih, P.S-Gopalpur, District-Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhramveer For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 111/2019 registered under Sections 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that when petitioner no. 1 refused to marry the grand daughter of the informant for some personal reasons, the present case has been lodged, however petitioners have got no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69753 of 2019(3) dt.13-12-2019 2/3 criminal antecedent.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that when petitioner no. 1 refused to marry the ground daughter of the informant for some personal reasons, in order to take revenge the present case has been lodged alleging that petitioners were demanding dowry. It is submitted that in course of investigation no material has been collected, learned A.P.P. has not controverted the submission, in the circumstances, let the above-named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, be enlarged on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. - XI, Gopalganj, in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 111/2019, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. i.e.
(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69753 of 2019(3) dt.13-12-2019 3/3 (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T