Virmani Bind v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26467 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-989 Year-2017 Thana- NALANDA COMPLAINT CASE District- Nalanda ====================================================== VIRMANI BIND Son of Late Heera Bind Resident of Village - Patasia, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Sarswati Devi D/O - Mahedra Bind, Wife of Virmani Bind Resident of Village - Ramsang, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.989C of 2017 registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the D.P.Act.

Case is under Section 498A of the IPC with allegation of demand and torture. It further appears that on appearance of the O.P.no.2 the matter was referred to the Media ton Centre but the report disclose that in spite of sincere effort, the mediation has failed.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is still ready to keep her but the O.P.no.2 is not ready to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26467 of 2019(6) dt.05-09-2019 2/2 reside with the petitioner as the allegation of O.P.no.2 is that he has solemnized second marriage. Demand is exorbitant and he is ready to pay Rs.2,50,000/- only whereas the demand of the O.P.no.2 is of Rs.04 lac.

Heard learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the O.P.no.2 who has submitted that the as the petitioner has solemnized second marriage and further the O.P.no.2 has one minor daughter also and as such she is demanding Rs.04 lac for entire future livelihood that is not exorbitant.. Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, and the petitioner has no controverted this fact that he has solemnized second marriage and he is also not ready for one time settlement, as such the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected and he may surrender and pray for regular bail.

With the aforesaid direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T