Anil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19162 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-941 Year-2022 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Anil Kumar son of Late Shivji Sah Village- Amrakh Ps- Maniyari DistMuzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mina Kumari wife of Anil Kumar Village- Amrakh Ps- Maniyari DistMuzaffarpur, D/o- Ganesh Sah @ Dinesh Sah Vill- Chainpur Fatepur PsKanti Dist- Muzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dr. Bipin Chandra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in a case instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation, complainant was married to petitioner in the year 2018. After two months of the marriage, petitioner and other accused persons started torturing the complainant for dowry of motorcycle, gold chain and Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand rupees). It is further alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19162 of 2024(6) dt.31-01-2025 2/3 that accused persons sprinkled Kerosene oil on the body of the complainant and petitioner tried to ablaze her. It is further alleged that, later, accused persons forcibly took the signature of complainant on a blank paper and planned to kill her due to which she left her matrimonial house
4. From perusal of the mediator's report (Flag 'M'), it appears that the dispute between the parties could not be settled through the process of mediation. Hence, mediation failed.
5. In pursuance to the direction of this Court, both parties appeared with their respective counsel. The wife (complainant) is ready to live with the petitioner but the petitioner (husband of O.P. No. 2) is not ready to keep his wife and he flatly denied to lead conjugal life with his wife, without any just and cogent reason despite the fact that there are two minor children out of their wedlock.
5. Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that petitioner denied to lead the conjugal life.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19162 of 2024(6) dt.31-01-2025 3/3 and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
7. The petitioner is directed to surrender before learned court below and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the court below, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Nirajkrs/- U T