Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused under Section 498A IPC in a dowry-related FIR, directing surrender within six weeks upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties.
Anticipatory bail granted; surrender within six weeks required; bail bonds of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.53062 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2017 Thana- SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad, APP For opposite party No.2 : Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 09-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation against the petitioners is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner No.1 is father-in-law of the victim and petitioner No.2 is mother-in-law of the victim. They are
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53062 of 2017(2) dt.09-11-2017 2/2
separate in mess and property from the husband of the victim. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioners have 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.
On behalf of the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the complaint case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M. Sadar, Sitamarhi in connection with Complaint case No. C-467 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
Narendra/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail while in the event of their arrest or surrender in the present allegations.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of BiharReferred¶18
2006(3) PLJR 182
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Umesh Chandra Shahi
Bibha Shahi
The State Of Bihar
Uma Shahi
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
