Allowed

Gajendra Pandit v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Oct 2020CR. MISC./23498/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges of dowry harassment and cruelty under sections 498-A and 504 IPC. The grant was conditioned on the petitioner being released if arrested, due to an amicable settlement between the husband and wife and their resumption of joint living.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below, upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount.

Gajendra Pandit Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23498 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2017 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

GAJENDRA PANDIT S/o Yogendra Pandit Resident of Village-Baluha Banjaraha, P.S.-Kundwa Chainpur, District-East Champaran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Rema Devi Wife of Gajendra Pandit Resident of Village-Baluha Banjaraha, P.S-Kundwa Chainpur, District-East Champaran.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Shankar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan For the informant : Mr. Pravin Kumar ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 08-10-2020

¶13

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the complainant-Opposite Party No. 2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State, through Video Conferencing.

¶14

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Trial No. 2300 of 2018, arising out of Complaint Case No. C-17 of 2017, in which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶15

The allegation against the petitioner, as per the complaint petition, is that the marriage of Opposite Party No. 2 was solemnized with the petitioner eight years prior to the filing

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23498 of 2020(3) dt.08-10-2020 2/3

¶17

of the compliant petition and after six months of the marriage, the petitioner started demanding one motorcycle by way of dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the said demand, the Opposite Party No. 2 was being tortured physically as well as mentally.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2, who are husband and wife, have amicably settled all their disputes and at present, the Opposite Party No. 2 is living in the house of the petitioner with due honour and dignity.

¶19

Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 confirms the statement made by learned Counsel for the petitioner and submits that both the parties have arrived at a compromise and are living together.

¶20

After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact that the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2, after settling their disputes, are living together, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶21

This application is allowed.

¶22

Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23498 of 2020(3) dt.08-10-2020 3/3

¶24

Court below within a period of six weeks from today, upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sikrahana, at Dhaka, East Champaran, in connection with Trial No. 2300 of 2018, arising out of Complaint Case No. C-17 of 2017.

¶25

It is made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bonds, all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

¶26

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶27

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶28

U √ T √

Gajendra Pandit v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Pandit 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

Jay Dayal Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Nipu Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Shobha Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Tanveer Hussain @ Dablu Mian Vs the State of Bihar

Sanjay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Niraj Singh Vs The State of Bihar