Raj Mohan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25988 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3003 Year-2021 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== Raj Mohan Pandey, Son of Braj Mohan Pandey Resident of Village Shambhu Chhapra, P.O.- Basahi, P.S.- janta Bazar, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Puja Kumari, Wife of Raj Mohan Pandey and D/o Devendra Pandey At present residing at Village- Ghataro Chaturbhuj, P.O. and P.S.- Kartahan, District- Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Satish Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Asha Devi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-07-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 323/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the D. P. Act.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that from perusal of the office report dated 28.06.2024, it would manifest that the same records that:- "Ordinary notice returned unserved with report that opposite party no.2 resides at Hajipur. Further, registered cover notice returned unserved with report that addressee is not available. The learned counsel submits from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25988 of 2024(3) dt.29-07-2024 2/3 perusal of the address as recorded on the notice, which has been returend it would manifest that the same was sent on the same address as recorded in the complaint case where opposite party no.2 is residing presently i.e. at Vaishali. It is next submitted that deliberately the opposite party no.2 is avoiding the notice."
4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the Court proceeds to decide the case on merits.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, being husband, has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is next submitted that at Para-10, it has been specifically pleaded hat petitioner is still ready and willing to keep the opposite party no.2 with dignity and honour, but then, opposite party no.2, for reasons best known, does not intend to restitute her conjugal rights. It is also submitted that if the opposite party no.2, at any point of time, contacts the petitioner and shows her interest in reviving the conjugal relationship, the petitioner will immediately go to her parental home to bring her back to her matrimonial home. It is also submitted that petitioner has also filed an application seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which amply demonstrates that petitioner is interested in reviving his conjugal relationship, but then, opposite party no.2 seems reluctant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25988 of 2024(3) dt.29-07-2024 3/3
6. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Saran in connection with Complaint Case No.3003 of 2021, Trial No.2659 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T