In a Criminal Miscellaneous petition under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner on his personal bond subject to post-normalcy security.
Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond, conditional on arrest/surrender within 12 weeks and furnishing security within 8 weeks of normalcy.
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.10174 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1297 Year-2019 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Sandeep Kumar Son of Kishun Ram Resident of Village - Ambedkar Nagar Colony, Silauta, P.S. - Sonhan, District - Kaimur at Bhabhua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.A.G. For the Complainant : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
through virtual mode.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture upon the victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10174 of 2021(2) dt.22-06-2021 2/3
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 petitioner is husband of the complainant. 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, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also the lockdown, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Complaint Case No. 1297 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10174 of 2021(2) dt.22-06-2021 3/3
to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.
If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of dowry harassment.
What conditions must the petitioner satisfy to avail of anticipatory bail during the lockdown period.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sandeep Kumar
The State of Bihar
Durga Kumari
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
