Rahul Kumar Bharti v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14856 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2018 Thana- SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAHUL KUMAR BHARTI, aged about 28 years, Male, Son of Shatrudhan Kumar Bharti, Resident of Village- Chilra, P.S.- Sonbarsha, DistrictSitamarhi ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rinku Devi, aged 22 years, Female, Wife of Rahul Kumar Bharti, Resident of Village- Chilra, P.S.- Sonbarsha, District- Sitamarhi, at present residing at D/o Achchhelaal Ram, Resident of Village- Malangwa, Thana- Malangwa, District- Sarlahi (Nepal) ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Parties :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the State.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. C-1-81 of 2018 for the offence alleged under Sections 498A, 323, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The accusation is of torturing of the complainant/opposite party no. 2 by her husband for demand of dowry and non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and removing her, along with the baby aged about 2 years, from the matrimonial house.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14856 of 2019(4) dt.25-06-2019 2/2 matter was referred to Patna High Court Mediation Center, but, the matter could not be settled.

The learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party no. 2 submits that the petitioner, who is the husband of complainant/opposite party no. 2, has performed re-marriage with another lady and from the wed-lock there is also an issue and due to that reason the petitioner was not inclined to keep the complainant/opposite party no. 2 with him and also not ready to settle the dispute in an amicable manner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in connection with Complaint Case No. C-1-81 of 2018 pending in the Court of the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a week and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial Court on its own merit. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Shamshad/- U T