Md Saddam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8635 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-930 Year-2020 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Jamui ====================================================== MD SADDAM Son of Md. Yusuf Resident of Tetarhat, P.S.- Tetarhat, District- Lakhisarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Tahzeema Khatoon W/o Md. Saddam, D/o Md. Samsher Resident of Islamnagar, Mariyar, Ward No.26, P.S.- Jamui and District- Jamui. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Pushpa Sinha, APP For the Informant :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. No one appears on behalf of the informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 341, 506, 342 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Without going into the merits of the case as it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is always ready and willing to keep the informant as his wife with all dignity and honor but the informant does not want to stay with the petitioner rather the dispute is that petitioner should always keep her where he works.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8635 of 2022(2) dt.02-09-2022 2/2 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No. 930C/2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

The learned trial court shall notice the informant and will try for an amicable solution between the parties and in the event, if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner is not willing to keep his wife, despite wife intending to go with him or is not willing to maintain her, in the event if she does not want to go, then will be at liberty to pass orders in accordance with law. Further, if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that it is the informant who is creating hurdles then after recording reasons, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner shall be confirmed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/GauravU T