This oral order granted bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a matrimonial offence case. The court held the notice service valid due to shared residence. Petitioner released on bond with conditions.
Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like amount each.
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.9620 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2021 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Shashikant Kumar @ Chhotu Son of Late Dilip Singh Resident of VillageMogalpura, Post- Lakhanpura, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1 ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER
4 12-12-2022
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a jointness petition stating therein that the notice, issued to O.P. No.2, has been received by her father and O.P. No.2 and her father are living together in the same house.
In view of the fact aforesaid, the notice is treated to be validly served upon O.P. No.2.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 498(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.2, is said to have ousted the opposite party no.2 from her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9620 of 2022(4) dt.12-12-2022 2/3
matrimonial home in association of his family members over the dowry demand.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an innocent person and has committed no offence. Petitioner has neither made any dowry demand nor drove her out of her matrimonial home nor tormented her over the demand of dowry. He is still ready to keep her with full honour and dignity. 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 .
In that view of the matter, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Suryagadha P.S. Case No.53 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9620 of 2022(4) dt.12-12-2022 3/3
make an application before the learned court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Centre for the purpose of
reconciliation or for one time settlement.
Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case involving offences of assault, dowry demand, and criminal intimidation under the IPC and DPD Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State of BiharRelied on¶19
2006 (3) PLJR 182
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shashikant Kumar @ Chhotu
Rinnu Kumari
Anjani Kumar Sharan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
