This bail order releases the petitioner from custody in a dowry torture case under Section 498A IPC, directing him to furnish a bond for Rs.10,000 with sureties.
Released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the 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.17118 of 2018
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -38 Year- 2016 Thana -JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE DistrictJEHANABAD
====================================================== Sintu Kumar, Son of Rajnath Prasad, Resident of Village- Govindpur, Police Station- Chandauti in the district of Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner Versus
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Navin Sharma, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 27-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 06.02.2018 in a case for the offence registered under Section 498(A) of the IPC.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17118 of 2018 (2) dt.27-03-2018
2/2
petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. 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.
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.
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 J.M. Ist Class-cumMunsif, Jehanabad, in connection with Complaint Case No. 38 of 2016.
U.K./U T
(Sudhir Singh, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner in a Section 498A case should be granted bail upon furnishing a bond.
Whether the petitioner has any criminal antecedents or tampered with witnesses.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of BiharReferred¶16
2006(3) PLJR 182
Sintu Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sanju Kumari
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
