Romi Shrivastava @ Dimanshu Shrivatava @ Divanshu Shekhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19780 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2018 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Romi Shrivastava @ Dimanshu Shrivatava @ Divanshu Shekhar, Son of Laxman Prasad, Resident of Hardiya, Ward No. 21, Narkatiyaganj, P.S.- Shikarpur, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Supriya Raj, Wife of Romi Shrivastaa @ Dimanshu Srivastava @ Divanshu Shekhar, Resident of Mohalla - Narkatiyaganj, Registry Road Ward No. 14, P.S.- Shikarpur, District- West champaran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-07-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No.332 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 341, 34 of IPC and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation as per F.I.R. against the petitioner is that who happens to be the husband of the informant that after marriage he demanded Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) and also some land from the opposite party no.2 and subjected her with cruelty and harassment and also assaulted her after taking liquor.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is still ready to keep her with full dignity and care but the opposite party no.2 is not ready to reside with him. She only

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19780 of 2019(3) dt.04-07-2019 2/2 wants divorce from the petitioner.

On appearance of the opposite party no.2, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation & Reconciliation Center vide order dated 04.04.2019. The report of Mediator is available on record at Flag "E" which disclosed that the dispute between the parties has not been resolved in spite of sincere efforts through the process of mediation.

Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also, who has submitted that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the petitioner with respect to demand of dowry. He behaved like a monstrous. In such situation she is not interested to live with the petitioner. Having heard both sides, considering facts and circumstances, as stated above, this application is allowed. Provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 04.04.2019 is confirmed, subject to condition that if any, maintenance case or divorce case is being filed by the opposite party no.2/informant, he has to co-operate in disposal of the same.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil shukla/- U T