IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63216 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2019 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Dev Lal Murmu S/O Jagdish Murmu Resident of village - Harwadanga, Kasibar, P.S. - Dighalbank, District - Kishangnaj ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Nachan Soren W/O Dev Lal Murmu Resident of village - Harwadanga, Kasibar, P.S. - Dighalbank, District - Kishangnaj At present,R/O PathiBigha Kashibari, PS-Thakurganj, Distt-Kishanganj ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 4 10-12-2025 Heard Mr. Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ram Pravesh, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 368 of 2019 registered under sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 28.05.2019 by the informant, Nachan Soren. 3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the marriage took place 12 years ago but was always tortured for dowry. In between, she gave birth to the child but the tortured continued. The matter was also reported to the sarpanch of the gram panchayat Budhnai, a meeting was to be Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63216 of 2025(4) dt.10-12-2025 2/2 held but the accused failed to join the proceeding which follows the case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a decade old marriage, no such incidence took place and exaggerated FIR is there. 5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that not only he has evaded arrest for six years, the FIR is of the year 2019, neither the wife nor the child is being taken care of and further he has re-married despite the first wife alive and not divorced. 6. Considering the submissions of the parties, as also that the FIR is of the year 2019, the petitioner evaded arrest for six years and the allegation is that he has remarried, in that background, it will be appropriate that he seeks bail 7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. vashudha/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U T