Ranjan Kumar Shahi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24772 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1785 Year- 2012 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar Shahi Son of Devendra Shahi Resident of Village- Bhoja Bishunpur, P.S- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sabita Kumari, Wife of Ranjan Kumar Shahi, D/o Shreekant Sharma, resident of Nenampur, P.S. Paroo, Deorio (O.P) District Muzaffarpur .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 498A, 323 read with Section 34 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered in connection with Complaint Case No. 1785 of 2012.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the disputes have since been resolved between the parties who are now living together as husband and wife harmoniously. The parties are presented themselves suo motu and confirm the fact that they are living together.
4. Notice was issued to opposite party no.2 which
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24772 of 2014 (4) dt.20-05-2015 2/2 has been served personally.
5. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner by order dated 18.09.2014 pending in the Court of Sri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Muzaffarpur in connection with Complaint Case No.1785 of 2012 stands hereby confirmed with additional condition that if in future any similar complaint/FIR is filed by the Opposite Party No.2 against the petitioner, his bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U T