Dharmendra Kumar Sah @ Dharmendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18630 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1279 Year- 2011 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Sah @ Dharmendra Sah, S/o Jagdish Sah, Resident of Village Hit Kishanpur, P.S. Maniari, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Uma Devi, wife of Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra Kumar Sah, daughter of Ram Chandra Sah, resident of village-Rain Basera, near Bhikhari Bridge, P.S. Sachivalaya, District-Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. For the State : Mr. For the Complainant/Opposite Party No.2 : None. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ------------- 30-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. No one appears on behalf of the complainant/opposite party no.2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Complaint Case No.1279(C) of 2011 registered under Sections 498(A) and 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is of torturing the complainant/ opposite party no.2 by her husband (petitioner) and other in-laws for non fulfillment of the dowry demand and ousting the complainant/opposite party no.2 alongwith her children from the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18630 of 2014 (4) dt.30-01-2017 2/3 sasural house. There is also allegation that the petitioner, the husband of the complainant/opposite party no.2, also performed remarriage Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the complainant/ opposite party no.2. The petitioner is ready to keep his wife, the complainant/opposite party no.2, and the allegation against the petitioner of performing remarriage is totally false and concocted. Further submission is that vide order dated 04.06.2014, a Bench of this Court, while issuing the notice to the complainant/opposite party no.2 under ordinary process as well as registered cover with A/D, in the meantime, directed the petitioner to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No.1279(C) of 2011 but while the vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of the complainant/opposite party no.2 but no one was present on her behalf on 27.01.2017 nor no one is present on her behalf today.

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 04.06.2014 passed by a Bench of this Court is hereby made

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18630 of 2014 (4) dt.30-01-2017 3/3 absolute and this application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T