Bikash Jha @ Vikash Jha v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29762 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2014 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Bikash Jha @ Vikash Jha, Son of Late Dinesh Jha, R/O Village-Dostiyan, P.S.-Sonbarsa, District-Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rakhi Devi W/o Vikash Jha, D/o Anil Jha, Dostiyan, P.S.-Sonbarsa, District-Sitamarhi present address:-D/o Anil Jha, R/o Village-Bhairo Kothi, P.S.-Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Dilip Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sitamarhi (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2014, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is husband. The wife made allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner subjected her to all sorts of torture due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. The matter was referred to mediation centre, but the dispute between the husband and wife could not be resolved.

It is submitted that the petitioner is not ready to keep his wife and he wanted time for settlement for dissolution of marriage.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29762 of 2014 (3) dt.19-05-2015 2/2 The father of the informant earlier filed Sitamarhi Sadar P.S. Case No. 460 of 2013 in which the police after investigation submitted final form finding the case true only against Dinesh. The informant made statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and she disclosed that her brother-in-law called her at station thereafter Dinesh and Chandan, her brother-in-law took her to Ranchi and subjected her to all sorts of torture.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informantwife submitted that she is ready to live with her husband but her husband wanted to divorce her.

Taking into consideration that the petitioner being the husband subjected his wife to all sorts of torture and petitioner is not ready to keep his wife, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T