Allowed

Shamshul Imam v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Nov 2023CR. MISC./35440/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an FIR alleging dowry harassment and assault. The court directed surrender within six weeks and approved a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties, along with the surrender of arms if any.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within six weeks and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties.

Shamshul Imam Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35440 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-492 Year-2022 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

SHAMSHUL IMAM S/O MUSTKIM ANSARI R/O Village- Kolhuad Bagahi, P.s- Kateya, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Sahana Khatoon W/O Shamshul Imam R/O Village- Kolhuad Bagahi, P.SKateya, Distt.- Gopalganj. At Present D/O- Shahid Ansari,R/O VillageLohathi, P.S- Kateya, Distt.- Gopalganj.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Asha Kumari, A.P.P For the Informant/s : Mr. Pankaj Maisorwar, Advocate Mr. Nagedeo Choubey, Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 23-11-2023

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶16

remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within

¶17

a period of three weeks from today.

¶18

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶19

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as leaned counsel for the informant.

¶20

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kateya P.S Case No. 492 of 2022 dated 04.11.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A and 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 and 4 of the D.P Act.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35440 of 2023(4) dt.23-11-2023 2/3

¶22

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is husband of the informant. 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." Learned counsel has further submitted that Section 498A of the IPC is triable by the Magistrate. Learned counsel has further relied on the judgments in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCR 351 and Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2207 of 2023 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 3433 of 2023 . The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

¶24

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35440 of 2023(4) dt.23-11-2023 3/3

¶26

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Gopalganj in connection with Kateya P.S Case No. 492 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

8. 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 reconcilation or one time settlement.

¶28

9. The application stands allowed.

¶29

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶30

atul/-

Shamshul Imam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamshul Imam 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

Kalu Ray @ Binod Ray @ Kallu Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Pravesh Mishra Vs the State of Bihar

Dipnarayan Kumar Kushawaha Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Ray Vs the State of Bihar

Ravindra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tahir Hussain @ Tahir Vs The State of Bihar