Ali Hussain Ansari @ Ali Hussain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38064 of 2015 ====================================================== Ali Hussain Ansari @ Ali Hussain son of Munna Ansari, Resident of village- Banchauri, P.S.- Dumra, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amit Kr. Rakesh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 26-08-2015 The present application has been filed for modification of order dated 27.02.2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3678 of 2013 for confirmation of the provisional bail. The petitioner being the husband of the complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail for one year in connection with Complaint Case No. C-1/737 of 2012 wherein processes were directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC, pending in the court of learned SDJM, Sadar, Sitamarhi. The provisional bail was granted to the petitioner on submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour. The provisional bail was to be confirmed by the learned court below if

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38064 of 2015 (2) dt.26-08-2015 2/2 the matrimonial harmony is substantially restored or if the complainant deliberately refuses to reside with the petitioner. The modification has been sought for on the ground that the matrimonial harmony could not be restored due the latches on the part of the complainant.

Considering the fact that the petitioner was granted provisional anticipatory bail for one year on 27.02.2013 which expired on 26.02.2014 whereas the present modification has been filed on 13.08.2015, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present modification application.

However, let the learned court below consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner keeping in view of the fact that the petitioner has enjoyed the privilege of provisional anticipatory bail for considerable period and at this stage no useful purpose will be served by putting the petitioner under custody. Moreover, it is expected that the learned court below will expedite the trial.

Accordingly, this modification application is disposed of.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T