IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.41425 of 2010
MAJISTER MAHTO, son of Sri Sarvan Mahto
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
2/- 21.12.2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned counsel for the State.
2. Petitioner is an accused for offences punishable
under section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is the husband of the alleged victim and in fact, the
alleged victim who is daughter of the complainant, never
wanted to live with the petitioner and she herself went to her
maike with her father. Informatory Petition No. 144 of 2009
dated 10.02.2009, filed by father of the petitioner before the
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur clearly showed that
the alleged victim herself did not want to leave with her
husband and her father took her to his place.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State
vehemently opposes the contentions of the learned counsel for
the petitioner and submits that in the complaint it has been
stated by the complainant who happens to be the mother of
2
the alleged victim that she apprehended that the victim had
been killed by the petitioner, hence he submits that this is a
serious matter.
5. It is quite apparent that the F.I.R. was lodged by
the complainant under section 498(A) of the I.P.C. and no
other provision of law has been mentioned, and hence, the
only allegation against the petitioner which is being
investigated is with respect to Section 498 (A) of the I.P.C.. It
is also apparent that the petitioner has remained in custody
since 29.05.2010.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances
aforementioned, petitioner named above is directed to be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur(Patna) in
connection with Complaint Case No. 321 ( C) of 2009.
(S. N. Hussain, J. )
Ashwini/-