Riyaz Idrishi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90172 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2024 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Riyaz Idrishi Son of Seraj Idrishi Resident of Village - Karwadiya, P.S. - Chand, District - Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Soni Khatoon @ Madina Khatoon W/o. Riyaz Idrishi, S/o. Nasim Miya Resident of Village - Karwadiya, P.S. - Chand, District - Kaimur at Bhabua, at present Resident of Village - Amaon, P.S. - Karamchat, District - Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.

Mr.Rajni Kant Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 323, 498A and 384 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner was married to opposite party no.2 in 2023. After sometime, petitioner and his family members started demanding motorcycle as dowry and on non-fulfilment of demand of dowry, accused persons committed torture on opposite party no.2 and ousted her from the matrimonial house. It is also alleged that the petitioner pressurized opposite party no.2 for unnatural sex.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90172 of 2024(6) dt.21-08-2025 2/2 victim. However, petitioner is ready to keep the victim in matrimonial house with honour and dignity.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as the informant oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that apart from the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the complaint, he is also not complying order dated 14.2.2025, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaimur at Bhabua directing the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.5000/- per month to opposite party no.2. Petitioner has not paid any single penny to her since that order.

6. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with the fact that petitioner is not paying interim solace/maintenance to opposite party no.2, his prayer for bail is accordingly dismissed.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T