Chandan Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Chandan Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on bail, upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, on bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram (Rohtas), in Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2022, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, husband of opposite party no. 2, who apprehends arrest in Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2022 registered for offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 498(A) and 34 IPC, should be enlarged on anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Court's answer

In the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of the order, the petitioner is to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram (Rohtas), in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2022, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J., order dt. 23-07-2024) granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to Chandan Ram, husband of opposite party no. 2 (Puja Devi), who apprehended arrest in Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2022 (Thana Sasaram Muffsil, District Rohtas), registered for offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 498(A) and 34 IPC over an alleged lathi-danda assault on his wife on 02.09.2022. In the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks, the petitioner is to be enlarged on bail on a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram (Rohtas), subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC. Counsel had submitted the FIR (lodged 03.09.2022) was false, that a parallel case (Kondi P.S. Case No. 37 of 2022) was filed on 04.09.2022, and relied on Md. Naimul Haque Ansari v. State of Bihar, 2006(3) PLJR 182.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14481 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-439 Year-2022 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas

====================================================== Chandan Ram Son of Surendra Ram Resident of Village-Dhankadha, P.S.Sasaram (M), District- Rohtas

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

Puja Devi D/O Sunil Ram R/O Vill.- Shilwa, P.O.- Semaura, P.S.- Kandi, Dist.- Garhwa, Jharkhand

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashi Kant For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

6 23-07-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Despite valid service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

The petitioner, husband of the opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 341, 323, 307, 504, 498(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, the opposite party no. 2 was married with this petitioner in the year 2019 as per Hindu Rituals and thereafter, it is alleged that on 02.09.2022, this petitioner and his brother assaulted by means of lathi-danda on the head, leg and back of the opposite party no. 2, due to which, she sustained several injuries.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14481 of 2024(6) dt.23-07-2024 2/3

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence, as alleged in the F.I.R., has ever taken place, but only to humiliate and harass the petitioner, this false and concocted case has been lodged by opposite party no. 2 on 03.09.2022. He further submits that just on the next date of filing the present case i.e. on 04.09.2022, the informant has lodged another case, vide Kondi P.S. Case No. 37 of 2022 leveling similar allegation. However, petitioner is still ready to keep the opposite party no. 2 with full honour and dignity. Moreover, the case is triable by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner has further 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 .

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let this petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram (Rohtas) in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2022, subject to the conditions, as laid down under Section 438(2) of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14481 of 2024(6) dt.23-07-2024 3/3

the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

anay

U T