Sunil Kumar @ Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2241 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Nalanda ====================================================== Sunil Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Son of Bishnudeo Ram Resident of Village - Khirouna, P.O. and P.S.- Rahui, District - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priti D/o Surendra Ram R/o Arout, P.O. Bena, P.S. Bena, Distt. Nalanda. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Indu Bhushan, Advocate For the State :
Mrs.Pronoti Singh, A.P.P.
For the O.P.-2 :
None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of complainant/opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner, husband of the opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Sections 498-A, 341, 323, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per F.I.R., the marriage of opposite party no. 2 was forcibly solemnized with this petitioner in Delhi and after the marriage, she stayed with her husband only for two days and thereafter, petitioner along with other family members demanded Rs. 14 lacs, as dowry, and started committing torture
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2241 of 2024(4) dt.02-05-2024 2/3 to her and lastly, on 12.09.2021, the opposite party no. 2 was ousted from her matrimonial house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while denying the allegations made in the complaint petition, submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he is husband of the opposite party no. 2. He further submits that due to love-affairs between petitioner and informant, marriage was solemnized and neither they demanded any dowry nor committed any torture to opposite party no. 2. However, petitioner is ready to keep the opposite party no. 2 with full honour and dignity. Moreover, 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. Petitioner has got clean antecedent.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let 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 learned S.D.J.M., Biharsharif, Nalanda in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2241 of 2024(4) dt.02-05-2024 3/3 connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 129 of 2021, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T