Md. Sahadat Hussain @ Sahadat Hussain v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67532 of 2018 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12501 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year- Thana- District- ====================================================== Md. Sahadat Hussain @ Sahadat Hussain, Son of Md. Motiur Rahman, Resident of Village- Mirjapur Ward No.5, P.S.- Bausi Baseti, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar 2.Bibi Nitu Thopa @ Rupnisha Pravin, Wife of Md. Sahadat Hussain, Resident of Village - Mirjapur, Ward No. 5, Bausi Baseti District - Araria at present wife of Mukesh Yadav, Resident of Musahari Tola Near Araria College Ward No. 7, P.S. Bausi, District - Araria. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Smt Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-06-2019 The present application has been filed for modification of order dated 06.09.2016 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 12501 of 2016 to the extent of waiving the condition of making payment of Rs.1500/- per month by the petitioner to informant-opposite party no. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner, being the husband of the informant, preferred Criminal Miscellaneous No. 12501 of 2016 with a prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with Araria Mahila P.S. Case No. 15 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 341, 323 and 298/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67532 of 2018(2) dt.26-06-2019 2/2 Court of learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Araria. The issue was resolved on the undertaking of the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to make payment of Rs.1500/- per month to the informant-opposite party no. 2 from November, 2016. Now the petitioner is not ready to make payment to the informantopposite party since she has already performed second marriage with one Mukesh Yadav and now she has two children from the second husband. Moreover, petitioner has also given talak to the informant-opposite party no. 2.

In view of the nature of submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to revise the earlier order. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file appropriate application before the learned Court below when the learned Court below issue notice to the informant-opposite party no. 2 and if it is found the informant has performed second marriage, in that eventuality the condition of payment will be modified by the learned Court below.

Accordingly, this application is disposed of. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T