Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Haldhar Pandey And Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 8 February, 2019

Author: Vikash Jain

Bench: Vikash Jain

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                    Criminal Miscellaneous No.7041 of 2019
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2018 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur

              ======================================================
           1. Haldhar Pandey (Male-64 years) son of Late Baleshwar Pandey
           2. Buchan Devi (Female-50 years) wife of Haldhar Pandey
           3. Sandhya Devi @ Sandhya Pandey (Female 36 years), wife of Manish Kumar
              Pandey, All the petitioners i.e. 1, 2 & 3 resident of village -Kaupa P.S-Karakat
              Gorari, District Rohtas.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioners
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioners    :        Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party :        APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-02-2019

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 406 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Downy Prohibition Act registered in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 165 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and there is no specific accusation of demand of dowry against petitioner nos. 1 and 2 who are parents of the informant's husband. The accusation of demand for a car has been made against petitioner no. 3 who is Gotini of the informant which itself is improbable. No injury has been sustained by the informant. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioners' arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7041 of 2019(2) dt.08-02-2019 2/2 thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-X, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 165 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and with further conditions --

(i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners shall be their close relatives.
(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.
(iii) That petitioner nos. 2 and 3 will be well represented and petitioner no. 1 shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.
(iv) That the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
BT/Chandran                                                               (Vikash Jain, J)

U     T