Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7108/2024bail granted

Md Aslam v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-13Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7108 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1389 Year-2020 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md Aslam S/o Md. Idris R/o Village- Harchanda Dakshin Tola, P.S.- Kanti, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Bihar 2.

Heena Khatoon W/o Md. Aslam R/o Village- Harchanda Dakshin Tola, P.S.- Kanti , Distt- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Dr. Bipin Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.

Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and opposite party no.2.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 323, 498A, 504, 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is of matrimonial cruelty and demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while denying the allegations, submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case because he is husband of the victim. Matrimonial Case No. 430 of 2020 is going on between the parties. Opposite party no.2 has filed Maintenance Case No. 310 of 2020 in which as per order of the court below petitioner has deposited Rs.70,000/- on 16.7.2024. Petitioner is a daily labourer having no fixed income. However, he undertakes that he petitioner shall regularly pay the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7108 of 2024(8) dt.13-09-2024 2/2 maintenance amount to opposite party no.2. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has 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.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as the informant does not controvert the aforesaid facts.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the undertaking of the petitioner, in the event of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let this petitioner, as named above, 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 the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, West Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No. 1389 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T