Allowed

Dhaneshwar Mehta v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2020CR. MISC./11673/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed anticipatory bail application filed by Dhaneshwar Mehta and wife. Held that general allegations of dowry harassment and torture do not justify arrest. Granted bail on ₹10,000 bonds with sureties under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of like amount before Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Dhaneshwar Mehta Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11673 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2014 Thana- GAMAHARIYA District- Madhepura

¶3

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

¶4

Dhaneshwar Mehta Son of Late Singheshwar Mehta Resident of Village + P.S. - Gamharia, District- Madhepura

¶5

Jirya Devi @ Jiriya Devi Wife of Dhaneshwar Mehta Resident of Village + P.S. - Gamharia, District- Madhepura

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar

¶9

Sanju Devi Wife of Sanjay Kumar Mehta Resident of Village + P.S. - Gamharia, District- Madhepura

¶10

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

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

¶12

Appearance :

¶13

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nagendra Prasad

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶16

01-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video

¶17

conferencing.

¶18

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Gamharia P.S. Case No. 61 of 2014, G.R. No. 732 of 2014 registered for the offence under Sections 498(A), 323 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

As per prosecution case, the accusation against these petitioners alongwith other co-accused have tortured the informant physically and mentally due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also for giving birth of two female child.

¶20

It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that there is general and omnibus allegation and there is no specific overt act

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11673 of 2020(2) dt.01-07-2020 2/2

¶22

against petitioners, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of informant respectively. It is further submitted that petitioners are living separately and they have nothing to do with the affairs of informant and her husband (son of petitioners), but since they are in-laws members, they have falsely been made accused. The husband of the informant has already been granted regular bail by the court below itself.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the bail application is allowed.

¶24

In the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let the above-named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Madhepura in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 61 of 2014 (G.R. No. 732 of 2014), subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.)

¶26

anay

Dhaneshwar Mehta v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaneshwar Mehta 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

Kanchan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Babita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Raja @ Mohammed Raja Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Aklesh Rajbhar Vs The State of Bihar

Dheeraj Kumar Akela @ Dheeraj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar