Karnbir Yadav @ Karnbir Kumar @ Karnvir Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15458 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2018 Thana- MADHEPURA COMPALINT CASE District- Madhepura ====================================================== Karnbir Yadav @ Karnbir Kumar @ Karnvir Kumar Son of Jai Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Dumariya Kolhay Patti, Ward No. 11, P.S.- Murliganj, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State of Bihar 2.

Sita Devi Wife of Karnbir Yadav @ Karnbir Kumar @ Karnvir kumar Daughter of Sita Ram Yadav, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. Murliganj, District - Madhepura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.141 of 2018, in which cognizance has been taken under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The allegation against the petitioner, as per complaint, is that the complainant had entered into marriage alliance with the petitioner on 04.03.2015 and just after their marriage, the petitioner and other family members started demanding motorcycle as dowry. It has further been alleged that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15458 of 2019(4) dt.24-07-2019 2/3 petitioner used to assault the complainant physically and also complainant has been tortured mentally by the petitioner and other family members.

The matter was referred in Mediation, where both were agreed to live together and the same would evident from the Mediator report dated 10.07.2019. Pursuant to the mediation, the petitioner had taken his wife i.e. O.P. No.2 with him to his village. Further according to O.P. No.2, who is present before this Court, the petitioner did not keep her with due care.

Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for O.P. No.2 submits that both, petitioner as well as O.P. No. 2, are present in Court.

Upon query made by this Court, the petitioner shows his willingness to keep his wife with him but the wife-O.P. No.2 refused to live with the petitioner.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is ready to keep his wife with him but the wife-O.P. No.2 has got some grievance, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

This application is, accordingly, allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15458 of 2019(4) dt.24-07-2019 3/3 Accordingly, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner by order dated 13.03.2019 is hereby confirmed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S. Katyayan/- U T