Md. Khurshid @ Mu. Khurshid @ Md. ... vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 355 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
            CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 78395 of 2019
    Arising Out of PS Case No.-7 Year-2018 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================

Md. Khurshid @ Mu. Khurshid @ Md. Khurshid Alam, aged about 32 years, Son of Late Abdul Rashid, Resident of Village - Badluchak, P.S.- Jagdishpur, District - Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sahina Parvin, Wife of Md. Khurshid, Daughter of Md. Kalim, Resident of Village- Sahjangi, PS- Hasepur, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 27-01-2021

Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the

petitioner; Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State and

Mr. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Jagdishpur PS Case No. 7 of 2018 dated 07.01.2018, instituted

under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that after

marriage in the year 2008, she lived in the matrimonial home

peacefully but since 2013, she was being tortured for dowry Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78395 of 2019 dt.27-01-2021

demand of Rs. 1 lakh and one motorcycle due to which she was

ousted from the matrimonial home and was living at her parents'

house. It was further alleged that the petitioner had solemnized

second marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after

2013, the petitioner kept trying to reconcile the matter and bring

the opposite party no. 2 back, but she refused to do so and finally

in a Panchayati, she had taken her articles. It was further

submitted that the petitioner herself has taken Fatwa in which she

has stated that the petitioner had given her divorce. Learned

counsel submitted that the petitioner has remarried and wrongly

statement was made in the main application that he has not

remarried. It was submitted that the petitioner was ready for a one-

time settlement but the amount demanded by the opposite party

no. 2 was exorbitant and beyond his reach as would be clear from

the assets, details of which he has brought on record by way of an

affidavit.

5. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner is the

husband and after demand of dowry when the opposite party no. 2

was forced to go to her parents' place, the petitioner also

remarried.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78395 of 2019 dt.27-01-2021

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2

submitted that, as has been stated in the counter affidavit filed by

her, the so-called signature of the petitioner while receiving the

list of articles is forged and fabricated and with regard to the

Fatwa, she has no knowledge of any such documents and never

she has admitted before any authority that the petitioner has

granted her divorce. Learned counsel submitted that a wife being

ousted from the matrimonial home and not taken back and there

being nothing to show that serious efforts were ever made by the

petitioner to bring her back to the matrimonial home or for

conciliation, the bald stand that the petitioner had tried to bring

her back is false.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T