Avinash Singh @ Tappu @ Avinash Kumar @ Tappu v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4593 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -608 Year- 2014 Thana -BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C DistrictBHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Avinash Singh @ Tappu @ Avinash Kumar @ Tappu son of Awadhesh Singh, resident of Village- Badahari, Police Station- Badahari, DistrictRohtas at Sasaram. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sandhya Devi Wife of Avinash Singh @ Tappu @ Avinash Kumar @ Tappu resident of village- Badahari, Police Station and Post officeBadahari, District- Rohtas at Sasram. At present resident of VillageBasawaria, Post Office- Mahila, Police Station- Kuchhila, District Kaimur at Bhabua.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Girish Chandra Sharma, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties : Mr. U.S.P.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 26-08-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner filed this quashing petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the order dated 05.10.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 14 of 2015, by which the learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua cancel the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner vide order dated 12.02.2015 passed in ABP No. 50 of 2015.

Shri Girish Chandra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not informed. Even today the petitioner is ready to keep his wife with all honour and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4593 of 2016 (2) dt.26-08-2016 2/2 dignity but it appears from perusal of the order itself that the petitioner himself did not appear in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua on many dates. The learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua directed the petitioner to go to the house of parents of his wife to bring his wife but the petitioner neither go to the house of parents of his wife nor appeared in court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner informed the learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua that he did not get any instruction from his client. Even after many adjournments when the petitioner neither appeared nor showed his willingness to keep his wife, the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was cancelled. Considering the facts aforesaid, I did not find any illegality in the order aforesaid. Accordingly, this quashing petition is dismissed.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T