Sridhar Chetan v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11301 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2626 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== SRIDHAR CHETAN Son of Mr. Prabhat Kumar Rai Resident of Priyadarshi Nagar, house no. 192/39 near D.P.S. School, P.S.- Rupapur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Bhawani Roy Wife of Sridhar Chetan Resident of E-108, Sai Poorna Apartment, Harlur Road-560068, Bengaluru (Karnataka). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mukeshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2019 Heard.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.2626(C) of 2018 registered under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The accusation is that the marriage of the opposite party no.2 was performed with the petitioner on 08.05.2009. After marriage, the opposite party no.2 was being tortured by her husband (petitioner) and other in-laws due to non fulfillment of the demand of dowry through various modes but, in the meantime, the opposite party no.2 gave birth to a female baby. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Divorce Case No.373 of 2016 in the court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna, in which the date was fixed for hearing. When

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11301 of 2019(3) dt.17-05-2019 2/2 the opposite party no.2 along with her father was returning after attending the court on 20.06.2018, then the petitioner, who had come in the court, dashed the opposite party no.2 and also abused her. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to ill behaviour of the opposite party no.2, the petitioner, who is the husband of the opposite party no.2, has filed the Divorce Case. In fact, the petitioner used to reside at Pune, where he is in job and from there he had come to attend the court in Divorce Case and the opposite party no.2 used to reside at Bengulru.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender by him within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No.2626(C) of 2018, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T