Md. Mansur Alam v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49281 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1825 Year- 2010 Thana -SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSAHARSA ====================================================== Md. Mansur Alam Son of Late Md. Hasan Resident of Village - Saharsa Basti, Ward No. 38, P.S- Saharsa, District - Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Md. Mustaquim Son of Md. Kalim Resident of Village - Islampur, P.SNauhata, district - Saharsa, .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 26-10-2016 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.

The present application has been filed for cancellation of bail, granted to opposite party no. 2 vide order dated 03.10.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37640 of 2012 in connection with Complaint Case No. 1825 of 2010, pending in the court of learned CJM, Saharsa.

The opposite party no. 2 being the husband of the sister of the petitioner-complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail for one year in a complaint case wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, on the submission on behalf of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49281 of 2014 (2) dt.26-10-2016 2/2 opposite party no. 2 that he is ready to keep the sister of the petitioner-informant as wife with full dignity and honour. The provisional bail was to be confirmed by the learned court below if the matrimonial harmony is substantially restored or if the sister of the complainant deliberately refuses to reside with opposite party no. 2.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite party no. 2 has failed to comply the undertaking given before this Court, however, admits that the provisional bail has not been confirmed It appears that the period of provisional bail has lapsed on 02.10.2013, hence the opposite party no. 2 is no longer on provisional bail.

In the circumstances, the present application for cancellation of provisional bail of opposite party no. 2 has become infructuous and accordingly, it is disposed of. Let the learned court below pass appropriate order in the matter.

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