The High Court permitted correction in the petition, noted the petitioner's custody and compromise between parties, and granted bail upon furnishing security in a case involving sections of IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.
Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.
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.5147 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2340 Year-2008 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran
======================================================
Mohamad Junain @ Md. Junain Son of Mahmad Keyamudin, Resident of Village - Anayay, P.S. Parsa, District-Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2019
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to
make necessary correction in Para-9 of this petition during the course of a day.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with Complaint Case No. 2340 of 2008 for the offences under Sections 323, 379, 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 21.09.2018. He further submits that earlier the petitioner was
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5147 of 2019(2) dt.30-01-2019 2/2
granted bail but on account of non appearance of the petitioner before the Court below, his bail bond was cancelled in the year 2012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband and his wife has compromised this dispute.
Having regard to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012)10 SCC 303 and the statement as to compromise between parties, the Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in connection with Complaint Case No. 2340 of 2008 vide Tr. No. 292 of 2018.
(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)
mdrashid/-
U T
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶20
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012)10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Mohamad Junain @ Md. Junain
The State of Bihar
Hasina Khatun
Anil Kumar Upadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
