Gautam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26556 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-608 Year-2021 Thana- BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Bhagalpur

¶3

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

¶4

Gautam Kumar S/o Gourishankar Matwala R/o Vill - Mahiyama, P.S. - Sanhaula, Dist. - Bhagalpur

¶5

Purusottam Mandal @ Pappu S/o Gourishankar Matwala R/o Vill - Mahiyama, P.S. - Sanhaula, Dist. - Bhagalpur

¶6

Gita Devi W/o Gourishankar Matwala R/o Vill - Mahiyama, P.S. - Sanhaula, Dist. - Bhagalpur

¶7

Gourishankar Matwala S/o Late Baldev Mandal R/o Vill - Mahiyama, P.S. - Sanhaula, Dist. - Bhagalpur

¶8

... ... Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar

¶11

Pinki Kumari @ Pinki Devi W/o Gautam Kumar, D/o Kameshwar Mandal R/o Vill - Mahiyama, P.S. - Sanhaula, Dist. - Bhagalpur

¶12

... ... Opposite Parties

¶13

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

¶14

Appearance :

¶15

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md. Nurul Hoda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P. Mr Vinay Kr.Mishra, Advocate

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶18

5 21-01-2025

¶19

Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Center of Patna High Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed (Report kept at flag ‘D’).

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State and the opposite party no.2.

¶21

Petitioners, who are husband of opposite party no.2, apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Prosecution case in brief is that opposite party no.2 was married with petitioner no.1 on 5.5.2009. After marriage, petitioner no.1 along with other petitioners started demanding

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26556 of 2024(5) dt.21-01-2025 2/3

¶24

dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the same they used to assault and torture her. Lastly, accused persons ousted opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, while denying the allegations, submits that these petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner no. 1 is husband, petitioner no.2 is dewar, petitioner no.3 is mother-in-law and petitioner no.4 is father-in-law of opposite party no.2. As a matter of fact, opposite party no.2 leads adulterous life and she is not agreeable to live with petitioner no.1 as a result of which petitioner no.1 filed Divorce case bearing Matrimonial case no. 139 of 2020 before the Family Court, Bhagalpur in which on notice as well as on paper publication, opposite party no.2 did not appear, consequently, court below passed exparte judgment dated 7.9.2022 and decree of divorce dated 20.9.2022 on the ground of cruelty. A copy of the judgment and decree is contained in annexure P5 to the bail petition. Learned counsel submits that the preset case has been lodged against the petitioners as retaliatory measure intended to settle scores, harass, and put pressure to these petitioners. The case is triable by the 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.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner no.1, being husband of opposite party no.2, in connivance with his family members, subjected her to harassment and cruelty for nonfulfillment of demand of dowry and also ousted to her

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26556 of 2024(5) dt.21-01-2025 3/3

¶28

parents’ house.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid facts of the case, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let these petitioners, above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate 1^st class, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No. 608/2021, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure .

¶30

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶31

Shashi

¶32

U T

Gautam Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Najrul Vs The State of Bihar

Sk. Wakil Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmbir Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Chaudhary @ Rajesh Chaudhari Vs The State of Bihar

Arbind Rai @ Arvind Kumar @ Arbind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar