Allowed

Mamtaz Quraishi @ Md. Mumtaz Quraishi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Aug 2024CR. MISC./32709/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband sought anticipatory bail in a dowry torture case where allegations were general and omnibus regarding a demand of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and attendance before the court below, leaving parties free to seek mediation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two like sureties, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and regular court appearance; liberty to seek mediation.

Mamtaz Quraishi @ Md. Mumtaz Quraishi Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32709 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Mamtaz Quraishi @ Md. Mumtaz Quraishi S/o Shamsuddin Quraishi R/oVillage Mehasi Kazichowk, Near Masjid, Police Station Mehasi, District East Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Shabaha Khatoon W/o Mamtaz Quraishi @ Mumtaz Quraishi, D/o Nasim Quraishi R/o vill - Mastan Tola, ward no. 24, P.s. - Bagaha, Distt. - West Champaran

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 23-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

2 . The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Bagaha Mahila P.S. Case No. 59 of 2023 registered for the offence/s punishable u/s 341, 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the D.P. Act.

¶14

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

¶15

co-accused persons are alleged to have tortured the informant mentally and physically due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32709 of 2024(3) dt.23-08-2024 2/3

¶17

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the husband of the informant. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel for 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.

¶18

5 . Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

¶19

6 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the allegation being general and omnibus,

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32709 of 2024(3) dt.23-08-2024 3/3

¶21

let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on 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, Rohtas at West Champaran, in connection with Bagaha Mahila P.S. Case No. 59 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with further condition/s:-

¶22

(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 bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

¶23

7 . If so advised, either of the parties will be at liberty

¶24

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.

¶25

8 . The application stands allowed.

¶26

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶27

Jyoti/-

¶28

U T

Mamtaz Quraishi @ Md. Mumtaz Quraishi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamtaz Quraishi @ Md. Mumtaz Quraishi 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. Tahseem @ Tahseen Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Satrudhan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar @ Amit Mahto @ Amit Vs The State of Bihar

Mahendra Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar