IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70389 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1648 Year-2023 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== 1. Niraj Kumar @ Niraj Kumar Mahto S/O Ramesh Mahto R/O Simaria,PS- Falka,Distt-Katihar 2. Ramesh Mahto S/O Late Soukhi Mahto R/O Simaria,PS-Falka,Distt-Katihar 3. Sushila Devi W/O Ramesh Mahto R/O Simaria,PS-Falka,Distt-Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Nirma Kumari W/O Ramesh Mahto and D/O Brahamdev Mahto R/O Village-Hajipur Diyara,Post-Mirja Chauki,PS-Sahebganj,Distt-Sahebganj ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhola Prasad, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shaheen Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 6 18-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioners are husband and parents-in-law. The allegation in the complaint is that the complainant was married to one Janardan Kumar Mahto, who is elder brother of the present petitioner no. 1, in the year 2019 and there were two children out of the wedlock. It has been further alleged that since the husband of the complainant indulged in some Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70389 of 2024(6) dt.18-06-2025 2/3 abnormal behaviour and activities, the complainant got married to the present petitioner no. 1, who happens to be the brother of her husband. There is further allegation of demand of dowry and torture. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset, denies the factum of marriage stating that a false allegation of he being the husband and establishing physical relationship has been imputed in the complaint petition. It has been submitted that as a matter of fact, the husband of OP.No. 2, Janardan Kumar Mahto is completely in his senses and is ready to keep his wife and his children along with him which it seems is not acceptable to the complainant/ OP.No.2. So far as the allegation of establishing physical relationship is concerned, the same is not established and moreover, if at all, any relationship has been established, it would only have been possible on the basis of consent and would be a conscious and informed choice of OP No.2. 5. Learned counsel for the informant/ OP.No.2 however submits that since her husband Janardan Kumar Mahto had started behaving in an abnormal manner, she got married to petitioner no. 1, hence supports the allegations made in the complaint. 6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70389 of 2024(6) dt.18-06-2025 3/3 circumstances and submissions of both the parties and specially taking into consideration the fact that petitioner no. 1 denies the marriage with the OP.No.2, let in the event of their arrest/ surrender within a period of four weeks from today the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand)with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/ successor court in C.A Case No. 1648 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C and subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall co- operate in investigation/ trial. N.K/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T