This oral order confirms the availability of provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner on 28.08.2019 in an allegation of torture arising from a dowry dispute under the revised Section 498-B IPC.
Confirmation of the previous anticipatory bail order dated 28.08.2019.
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.54218 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2019 Thana- EKANGARSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================
SHAMSHER ALAM Son of Late Nizamuddin Resident at Mohalla Quarter No. 15 Station Colony Bakhityarpur, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, Distt. Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rabindra Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lalan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
8 12-06-2020 Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of virtual Court proceeding.
The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For
Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.
The petitioner was granted anticipatory provisional
bail vide order dated 28.08.2019.
Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54218 of 2019(8) dt.12-06-2020 2/2
the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to petty family dispute. The case is triable by the Magistrate. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.
On behalf of the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case/F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 28.08.2019 is, hereby, confirmed in connection with Ekangarsarai P.S. case No.96 of 2019 pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Hilsa (Nalanda).
(Sudhir Singh, J)
Narendra/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the provision granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner on 28.08.2019 in connection with the present FIR under Section 498-B IPC should be confirmed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. The State of BiharReferred¶21
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, 2006(3) PLJR 182
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shamsher Alam
The State of Bihar
Roksana Praveen
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
