Lakhindra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8332 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2266 Year-2017 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== LAKHINDRA PRASAD, Son of Kishun Prasad, Resident of Village-Sirauli, P.S.- Madhuban, Dist. East Champaran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sunita Devi, Daughter of Ram Seval Bhagat, Resident of VillageBhagwanpur, P.S.- Madhuban, Dist. East Champaran ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2266 of 2017 lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner, who happens to be the husband, as per complaint petition is that he along with other accused persons tortured the opposite party No.2, complainant, with respect to demand of Rs.1 lac and motorcycle and ousted her from the house and further it appears that petitioner has married with another lady.

The matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre on appearance of opposite

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8332 of 2019(3) dt.16-05-2019 2/2 party No.2 vide order dated 13.2.2019 and petitioner was granted provisional bail. However, the report of Mediator at flag 'A' shows that opposite party No.2 did not appear on three dates, i.e., 8.3.2019, 23.4.2019 and 10.5.2019 and as such the dispute could not be resolved through the process of mediation. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is still ready to keep the complainant with him with dignity and care and he is also ready for one time settlement but opposite party No.2 did not appear in Mediation Centre on any date and the allegations are false and concocted. Heard learned APP. None appears on behalf of opposite party No.2.

In view of above facts and circumstances, this application is allowed and the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 13.2.2019 is, hereby confirmed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T