Balwant Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31399 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2014 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Madhepura ====================================================== Balwant Kumar Son of Late Kapildeo Prasad Mandal, Resident of VillageMadhepura Shastri Nagar, Ward No. 19, P.S. and District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State Of Bihar 2.
Sumita Kumari, D/o Arvind Kumar Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Vidyapuri, Ward No. 18, P.S. and District- Madhepura.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Sunita Kumari, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmanand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case is of the year 2014, in which, charges have been framed and the petitioner is the husband. It is next submitted that the marriage of the petitioner with the O.P No.2 was performed in the year 1995, thereafter in 2004, the petitioner gave divorce to the O.P. No. 2 and thus was living separately, it is further submitted that the petitioner in the year 2014 after obtaining divorce from the O.P. No.2 performed his second marriage, when the present false F.I.R. came to be instituted in the year 2014 itself, it is next submitted that despite charges
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31399 of 2017(2) dt.10-10-2023 2/2 having been framed in the year 2016 but till date the trial has not concluded nor the O.P. No.2 is showing any interest in the case nor is appearing for the trial.
3. The learned counsel after making aforesaid submission submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in the event if a direction is given to conclude the trial within a time frame.
4. The learned APP does not dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner since the trial has commenced, as such the Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. However, the Court expects that the trial shall be disposed of expeditiously. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T