Allowed

Manjeet Ram v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Nov 2023CR. MISC./41232/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a husband sued under Section 498A IPC, allowing him to surrender within six weeks and furnish a bail bond subject to court conditions and a proposal for mediation.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail to surrender and furnish a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties within six weeks.

Manjeet Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41232 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-716 Year-2022 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas

¶3

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

¶4

Manjeet Ram S/O Muni Kahar @ Muni Ram Kahar @ Muni Ram R/O Village- Manik Parasi, P.S- Karakat, Distt.- Rohtas.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar.

¶8

Bhavana @ Kajal Devi W/O Manjeet Ram, D/O Chhathu Prasad (CHANDRABANSI) R/O Village- Khetalpur, P.S- Sanjhauli, Distt.- Rohtas.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

5 10-11-2023

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶16

remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶17

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶18

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶19

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rohtas Complaint Case No. 716 of 2022 dated 19.05.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

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 Rs.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41232 of 2023(5) dt.10-11-2023 2/3

¶22

Rs. 1,00,000/- (One lac) as 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. It is further submitted that petitioner and his family members neither tortured nor demanded any dowry to the complainant and her family. 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 has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner who is husband of the complainant.

¶25

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41232 of 2023(5) dt.10-11-2023 3/3

¶27

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, Bikramganj at Rohtas in connection with Rohtas Complaint Case No. 716 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶28

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 reconciliation or one time settlement.

¶29

9. The application stands allowed.

¶30

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶31

Nilmani/-

¶32

U T

Manjeet Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjeet Ram 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

Shri. Subechandra Rajbhar @ S. Rajbhar Vs The State of Bihar through CBI

Azad Yadav @ Azad Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mostt. Shama Devi @ Shyama Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Priyaranjan Upadhyay @ Bunty Upadhyay @ Priyaranjan Upadhayay @ Bittu Upadhayay @ Banti Upadhyay Vs the State of Bihar

Brij Mohan Singh @ Brij Mohan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Madan Gopal Prasad @ Madan Gopal Vs The State of Bihar