IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 58715 of 2018
Arising Out of Complaint Case No.-1273 C Year-2017 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE
District- Araria
Alijan @ Alijar S/o- Late Mahboob, resident of Village- Chaudharia, Tirhut
Bitta Chatar, P.S. Araria, District- Araria.
… … Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Bibi Afroza, W/o- Alijan @ Alijar, D/o Abdur Rahman, resident of Village-
Tilsulia, Basantpur, Ward No. 3, P.S. Araria, District- Araria.
… … Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-12-2018
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Complaint Case
No. 1273C of 2017 instituted under Section 498A of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner and other family
members is that he has mentally and physically tortured his wife,
the Complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) and further that he had
abducted and married the younger sister of the Opposite Party No.
2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
allegations are false and the story is fabricated and concocted as
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58715 of 2018 dt.20-12-2018
2/2
there was no demand of dowry. It was further submitted that the
opposite party no. 2 had left the matrimonial home. It has further
been stated in the petition that the petitioner is ready to settle the
matrimonial dispute. Earlier, notice was issued to the Opposite
Party No. 2, but despite her father receiving the same, nobody
appeared on her behalf when the matter was taken up and heard.
5. Learned A.P.P. submitted that the petitioner, who is
the husband of the Opposite Party No. 2, is alleged to have
kidnapped and married the younger sister of the Opposite Party
No. 2, which itself shows his character. It was further submitted
that nowhere in the entire petition, such fact has been denied by
the petitioner.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court
is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
7. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
Anand Kr.
AFR/NAFR
U
T
