Md. Sajeem v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25913 of 2015 (2) dt.30-07-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25913 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -640 Year- 2014 Thana -KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictKATIHAR ======================================================

1. Md. Sajeem, Son of Zamiruddin, Resident of Village- Barhakhor, Post Office- Sankola, Police Station- Abadpur, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mano Khatoon wife of Md. Sanjeev, daughter of Md. Aabad Ali, Resident of Village- Barhakhor, Post Office- Sankola, Police StationAbadpur, District- Katihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sandeep Patil For the Opposite Party/s Mr. Mustaque Alam(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 02/ 30.07.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioner happens to be husband of the complainant and admittedly, marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the complainant on 25.2.2009 but it is alleged that the petitioner and other accused started making illegal demand and put the complainant into cruelty due to non-fulfillment of the aforesaid demand. Moreover, petitioner has solemnized his second marriage. From perusal of the impugned order of learned Sessions Judge, Katihar, it appears that learned Sessions Judge directed the petitioner to surrender before the court below. Furthermore, learned Sessions Judge observed in the impugned order that if the petitioner makes a proposal of keeping the complainant with him before the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25913 of 2015 (2) dt.30-07-2015 court below and if the complainant accepts the aforesaid proposal, the concerned court shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law taking note of the aforesaid fact.

Taking into consideration the above stated facts, I do not feel it proper to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint case no. 640/2014 pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar/ concerned court stands rejected with this observation that the petitioner must obey the direction of the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar and if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within four weeks from today, learned court below shall proceed with the matter in accordance with the direction given by the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar vide order dated 31.3.2015. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J) U T