Anticipatory bail granted to Gajendra Yadav in a case under Section 498A IPC. Court noted allegations were general and the complainant had died.
Granted four weeks to obtain anticipatory bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with sureties from Sessions Court.
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.20279 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2014 Thana- MADHEPURA COMPALINT CASE District- Madhepura
======================================================
GAJENDRA YADAV Son of Jhadilal Yadav Resident of Village - Bharrahi, P.S.- Madhepura, Sahayak, P.S- Barrahi, Distt.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Vijaya Laxmi Srivastava, Adv. Mr.Jagannath Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 426 of 2014 in which cognziance has been taken under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation against the petitioner, as per complaint lodged by the complainant Ruby Devi, is that her marriage was solemnised with the petitioner on 15.07.2005. It is further alleged that petitioner and other family members demanded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and a motorcycle by way of dowry after marriage and due to non fulfillment of demand, the complainant was being tortured mentally and physically by the petitioner and other accused persons.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20279 of 2019(4) dt.06-08-2019 2/2
against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature and the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner as alleged. It has also been submitted that complainant was suffering from serious mental disease and she was under the treatment of Dr. H.R.P.Verma (neurologist) and she has died on 06.06.2016.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that allegation is general and omnibus in nature and the complainant/O.P.No. 2 has already died, as such I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Let the petitioner, abovenamed, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Madhepura in connection with Complaint Case No. 426 of 2014; subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
sujit/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the general nature of allegations and death of the complainant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gajendra Yadav
The State of Bihar
Ruby Devi
Anil Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
