Dismissed

Md. Arshad @ Arshad Ali v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC1 Feb 2018CR. MISC./54681/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's plea for anticipatory bail in a dowry case involving a dispute over paternity (negative DNA) and refusal to bring the child back to the husband. The court refused bail, directing surrender for regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected; petitioner directed to surrender and seek regular bail.

Md. Arshad @ Arshad Ali Vs The State Of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.54681 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2017 Thana- MANIGACHI District- Darbhanga

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Arshad @ Arshad Ali S/o Md. Asgar Ali @ Asgar Ali, R/o VillagePaktol Tole, Dhuria, P.S.- Manigachhi (Bajitpur O.P.), District Darbhanga.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

2 Md. Sahud D/o late Md. Jamshed R/o village Paktol Tola ( Dhuria) P.O. Nehra P.S. Manigachi, District Darbhanga.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 01-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Manigachhi (Bajitpur O.P.) P. S. case no. 124 of 2017, instituted for the offence under Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶14

As per allegation in the written report, the petitioner was having love affairs with the daughter of the informant for last three years. The petitioner used to visit the informant’s house regularly and, in course of such a visit, both were caught in compromising position by the villagers. The girl, ultimately, became pregnant and thereafter ‘ panchayati’ was held in the village and in that ‘ panchayati’ marriage of the daughter of the

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54681 of 2017(4) dt.01-02-2018 2/3

¶16

informant was performed with this petitioner. The ‘ Nikahnama ’ has been prepared which has been annexed as Annexure A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2. The daughter of the informant gave birth to a male child after 15 days of the ‘ Nikahnama ’ but the petitioner and other accused persons did not bring her back to matrimonial home from her parents’ house in spite of several requests and they have made demand of dowry as alleged in the F.I.R..

¶17

Main argument made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a DNA test of the child was done. The aforesaid paternity report has been enclosed as Annexure-2 to the bail petition which was found to be negative. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no DNA test done with the consent of the opposite party no.2. The daughter of informant was never told regarding paternity test of the child. He further submitted that the paternity report is of private hospital.

¶18

From the allegation in the written report and as also from the ‘ Nikahnama’ (Annexure-1 to the counter affidavit), it appears that the petitioner was having love affairs with the daughter of the informant and he also used to visit the house of the informant and establish physical relationship with the

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54681 of 2017(4) dt.01-02-2018 3/3

¶20

daughter of the informant, on account of which, she became pregnant and during ‘ panchayati ’ her marriage was performed with the petitioner. But, the petitioner has refused to keep the daughter of the informant after birth of male child. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Prayer for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.

¶22

Petitioner may surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail which shall be considered and disposed off on its own merit in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

¶23

(Sanjay Priya, J)

¶24

shyambihari/-

¶25

U T

Md. Arshad @ Arshad Ali v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Arshad @ Arshad Ali v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Kumar Vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation

Rajesh Kumar Mandal @ Rajesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Shambhu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Suman Kumar Singh @ Suman Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Farman Bakkho and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Akhtar Mian Vs The State Of Bihar