The High Court allowed the petitioners' request for confirmation of provisional anticipatory bail in an IPC and DP Act case, noting general allegations and the respondent's failure to contest the bail application.
Confirmation of provisional bail granted on 10.03.2022 on same terms and conditions for Banka Mahila P.S. Case No.48 of 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.14515 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Banka
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER
for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the D. P. Act.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and it is submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14515 of 2021(9) dt.20-09-2022 2/2
despite receiving notice, the opposite party no.2 chosen not to appear in the case to contest the bail. It is next submitted that it is the case under Section 498A of the I.P.C. in which the mother-in-law (petitioner no.1), cousin mother-in-law (petitioner no.2), cousin father-in-laws (petitioner nos.3, 4 and 5) and younger brother-in-law (petitioner no.6) are made accused along with the husband of the informant.
It is next submitted that the anticipatory bail application of the husband of the informant is pending consideration before this court. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the provisional bail granted to the petitioners vide order dated 10.03.2022 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions in connection with Banka Mahila P. S. Case No.48 of 2019.
The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the provisional anticipatory bail should be confirmed for the petitioners in the pending FIR.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sharda Devi
Jay Mala Devi
Arun Singh
Shambhu Singh
Neeraj Singh
The State Of Bihar
Satyavrat Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
