Allowed

Murtuja Ansari v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC11 Dec 2017CR. MISC./59469/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a Sachinvi Case involving dowry harassment offences under Sections 498A and others of the IPC, requiring a bond of Rs. 10,000 with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M. West Champaran at Bettiah.

Murtuja Ansari Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Domestic Violence | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.59469 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -329 Year- 2017 Thana -JOGAPATTI DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH)

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Murtuja Ansari, S/o Idrish Ansari, resident of Village- Bahuarawa, P.O.Laxipur, P.S.- Yogapatti (Sanichari), District- West Champaran.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar.

¶9

Tarana Khatoon, W/o Murtuja Ansari, D/o Habib Ansari, resident of Village- Bahuarawa, P.S.- Sanichari, District- West Champaran.

¶10

.... .... Opposite Parties

¶11

====================================================== Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

¶13

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 11-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

A.P.P. for the State.

¶16

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 30.08.2017 in a case for the offence registered under Sections 498(A), 341, 323, 308, 315/34 of the IPC.

¶17

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.

¶18

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. There is no allegation of

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59469 of 2017 (2) dt.11-12-2017

¶20

2/2

¶21

tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. There is no injury report to support the allegation made in the F.I.R. 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.

¶22

On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M. West Champaran at Bettiah, in connection with Yogapatti (Sanichari) P.S. Case No. 329 of 2017.

¶24

U.K./U T

¶25

(Sudhir Singh, J)

Murtuja Ansari v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murtuja Ansari v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravin Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Patel @ Sunil Patel Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Arvind Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Nivas Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Fakhruddin Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Ram Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.