Dinbandhu Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20046 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1588 Year-2016 Thana- BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== DINBANDHU BHARTI Son of Kailash Bharti Resident of VillageBhatoriya, P.S.- Madhusudanpur (Nathnagar) District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Asha Devi W/o Dinbandhu Bharti , Daughter of Chandrashekhar Prasad Mandal Resident of Village- Tahbalpur, P.O.- Sadar Bhagalpur, P.S.- Lodipur, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Indeshwari Prasad Mandal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1588 of 2016 registered under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 120B of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhagalpur.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is husband of the victim. He is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner.

Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20046 of 2019(5) dt.03-02-2020 2/2 petitioner has remarried with another lady and he is not ready to keep opposite party No.2. Earlier, vide previous order dated 25.07.2019, the matter was referred to the District Mediation Center, Bhagalpur, for settlement of the dispute between the parties but the mediation has already been failed.As such, this case is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is rejected. (Arvind Srivastava, J) K.K.RAO/- U T