Allowed

Subhkant Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Aug 2024CR. MISC./32164/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court, in a criminal miscellaneous matter, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner alleged in offences under various sections of the IPC and CrPC, subject to conditions and a bail bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on anticipatory bail for six weeks upon surrender with a bond of Rs. 20,000 and two sureties each, subject to specific conditions regarding court presence and mediation.

Subhkant Thakur Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32164 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2022 Thana- RUDRAPUR District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Subhkant Thakur son of Jeetan Thakur R/o village- Jamaila, P.S.- Rudrapur, Dist.- Madhubani (Bihar)

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶6

ORAL ORDER

¶7

3 02-08-2024

¶8

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

¶9

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 354B, 498A, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

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 a motorcycle and rupees two lakh as dowry. It is further alleged that the co-accused entered the house of the informant and molested her.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the

¶12

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32164 of 2024(3) dt.02-08-2024 2/3

¶13

informant. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The similarly situated co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 8518 of 2024. The petitioner is the 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 at para 3 of the bail petition.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32164 of 2024(3) dt.02-08-2024 3/3

¶17

20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with Rudrapur P.S. Case No. 110 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a condition:-

¶18

(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, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.

¶19

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.

¶20

The application stands allowed.

¶21

shivam/- U T

¶22

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

Subhkant Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhkant Thakur 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

Sushil Kumar @ Sushil Singh @ Sushil Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Rupesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raushan Kumar Ravidas @ Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Sanjit Pandit @ Sanjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nehal Alam @ Md Nehal Ahmad @ Md Nehal @ Nehal Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar