Md. Tausif v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1867 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1719 Year-2019 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria ====================================================== MD. TAUSIF SON OF MD. ROHIB RESIDENT OF VILLAGEAHMADPUR, PS- SIMRAHA, DISTT- ARARIA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Bibi Kaushar Wife Of Md. Tausif, Daughter Of Md. Monu Resident Of Village- Ahmadpur, Ps- Simraha, Distt- Araria At Present Residing At Village- Bangama, Ward No. 06, Ps And Distt- Araria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Nishant Sinha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :

N o n e ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-06-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2.

3. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 379, 354B, 420, 494, 498A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, committed torture and harassment to informant/Opposite Party No. 2 due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is husband of the complainant/Opposite Party

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1867 of 2024(4) dt.25-06-2024 2/2 No. 2. It is submitted that he never demanded any dowry and is ready to keep his wife. Petitioner claims clean antecedents. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a 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.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.

8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, in connection with Complaint Case No.1719(C) of 2019, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T