Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.14972 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Sukho Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh @ Anil Kumar Mandal S/O Prakash Singh @ Prakash Mandal R/O Village - Chatanma, P.S. Puraini, District - Madhepura 2. Prakash Singh @ Prakash Mandal S/O Brahmni Singh R/O Village - Chatanma, P.S. Puraini, District - Madhepura 3. Sita Devi W/O Prakash Singh @ Prakash Mandal R/O Village - Chatanma, P.S. Puraini, District - Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER 2 10-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Complaint Case No. 1079 of 2010 for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] and ¾ of D. P. Act. Allegation against the petitioners is that due to non- fulfilment of demand of dowry of Rs.50,000/- the accused including the petitioners have tortured the complainant Anita Devi. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is not the husband of the complainant. The case has been lodged falsely. It is further alleged that the petitioner no. 1 married to the complainant on 28.5.2010 according to Hindu Rituals in Singheshwar Temple Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14972 of 2012 (2) dt.10-04-2012 2 but it appears from the certificate issued by the Public Information Officer that no marriage has taken place on 28.5.2010 in Singheshwar Temple between Anita Devi (complainant) and petitioner no. 1 Sukho Singh. It is further submitted that the husband of the complainant is still alive. It is an admitted fact that the house of the complainant and the petitioner are in the same village. It further appears from the order of the learned Sessions Judge that both the parties have appeared in the Court and the petitioner is younger than the victim girl who has a son aged about 15 years from her first husband. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioners while opposing their prayer. Considering the facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, the above named petitioners will be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.7000/- (seven thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Madhepura in Complaint Case No. 1079 of 2010, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C and with further condition that (i) The petitioners will not indulge themselves in Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14972 of 2012 (2) dt.10-04-2012 3 similar or any other offence. (ii) One of the bailors must be the close relative of the petitioners. (iii) The petitioners will be well represented in the Court on each and every date and in case of absence for two consecutive dates or in case of violation of terms of bail, their bail bonds would be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. Kanchan/- (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 380

Statute Text:
Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code. Theft in a building, tent or vessel. Whoever commits theft in any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or used for the custody of property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.