Allowed

Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Feb 2024CR. MISC./10244/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application arising from a dowry case involving torture allegations, the High Court of Patna granted bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with sureties, subject to conditions including physical presence in court.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties, to be enforced by the learned court concerned at Bhojpur or Ara.

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10244 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhojpur

¶3

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

¶4

RAJESH KUMAR Son of Sri Jagat Rai @ Jagat Rai Resident of VillageSakaddi, P.S.- Koilwar, District- Bhojpur.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Lalita Kumari Wife of Rajesh Kumar, D/o Bridanandan Singh Resident of Village- Devkulli, P.S.- Bihta, P.O.- Musepur, District- Patna.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

11 01-02-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶13

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

¶14

2 . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

3 . The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S Case No. 125 of 2019 dated 25.07.2019 registered for the offence punishable u/s 341, 323, 379, 498 A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of Dowry Act.

¶16

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the

¶17

co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the complainant

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10244 of 2020(11) dt.01-02-2024 2/3

¶19

mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- and golden chain as dowry.

¶20

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 the husband of the informant/complainant. 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.

¶21

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶22

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10244 of 2020(11) dt.01-02-2024 3/3

¶24

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, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Mahila P.S Case No. 125 of 2019, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the following conditions :-

¶25

(i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, his bail bonds are liable to be cancelled.

¶26

8. The application stands allowed.

¶27

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶28

jyoti/-

¶29

U T

Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar 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

Md. Anwar Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Jat @ Sunny Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Baijnath Kumar Sah @ Baidyanath Kumar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Kuldeep Yadav @ Kuldeep Kumar @ Bhuwar Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Maskur @ Maskur Alam Vs The State of Bihar