Allowed

Md. Sultan Ahmad v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Feb 2023CR. MISC./21792/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court released the petitioner on anticipatory bail in a case involving dowry-related offences. The Court imposed a condition requiring the petitioner to pay Rs.3,000 monthly to the opposite party, with the remedy for the wife to cancel the bond upon default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing bond with sureties and paying Rs.3,000 monthly to the opposite party on the condition of failure.

Md. Sultan Ahmad Vs the State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21792 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saharsa

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Sultan Ahmad Son Of Md. Manjur Alam R/O Village And P.O.Khamhoti Ward No.-06, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar

¶8

Saiesta Pravin D/o Md. Ahsan Hasan, Vill- Fensha, P.O.- Ghordour, P.S.Salkhua via Simri Bakhtiyarpur District- Saharsa

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gulnar Begum, APP

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶15

5 21-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶17

Petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no2., is said to have ousted the opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial home in association of his family members over the dowry demand.

¶18

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

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21792 of 2022(5) dt.21-02-2023 2/3

¶20

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 Mahila P.S. Case No. 61 of 2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.,

¶21

Petitioner is ready to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) per month to opposite party no.2 in the second week of every month. If the petitioner fails to pay the aforesaid amount on two consecutive months, opposite party no.2 shall be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner.

¶22

It goes without saying that the aforesaid payment shall be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial maintenance case or any other collateral proceedings.

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21792 of 2022(5) dt.21-02-2023 3/3

¶24

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is directed to make available the bank account details of opposite party no.2 in the learned Court below.

¶25

If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty to make an application before the learned Court below for referring the matter to the District Mediation Center for the purpose of reconciliation or one time settlement.

¶26

Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

¶27

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶28

anand/- U T

Md. Sultan Ahmad v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Sultan Ahmad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saviya Devi @ Sabiya Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Bibi Sahani Vs the State of Bihar

Ravindra Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Jagdish Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nupur Devi Vs The State of Bihar