- (1.) THE present anticipatory bail application is filed under Sections 438 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail as the petitioner is having reasonable apprehension of his arrest in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No. 116 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1931 of 2013 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh. .
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Opp. Party No. 2 and perused the F.I.R. and other papers annexed to this application. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, who is husband of the informant, is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are of general in nature and the same are vague and without any basis. It is further submitted that a Title Matrimonial suit was instituted on 5.5.13 by the petitioner and after service of summons/gathering knowledge of the petitioner's suit, the complainant/informant has instituted the present FIR on 10.6.13, which is subsequent to the institution of the Title Matrimonial Suit. It is also submitted that the filing of the present FIR is a counter attack after institution of the Title Matrimonial Suit with a view to cause harassment to the petitioner by misusing and abusing the process of law. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that during the course of investigation, three independent witnesses have been examined who have also not supported the case of the prosecution. It is lastly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a government servant working in the Public Works Department, Varanashi and is a law abiding citizen is also ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of Informant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of causing mental and physical torture as also demand of dowry. By referring Annexure -A to the counter affidavit, field by the informant, it is further submitted that there is an evidence against the present petitioner for taking certain amount towards dowry. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is prima facie case against the petitioner with regard to involvement in the alleged offence and, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.;