Manish Gupta @ Manish Gupta Akela @ Manish Akela v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52438 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3 Year- 2015 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- MADHEPURA ======================================================

1. MANISH GUPTA @ MANISH GUPTA AKELA @ MANISH AKELA, son of Parmeshwar Sah, resident of village - Chousa Ward No. 8, P.S. Chousa, District Madhepura.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Anupam Kumari, D/o Subodh Sah, W/o Manis Gupta, current resident of village - Ararghat, P.S. Arar (Uda Kishunganj) District Madhepura. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadimul Hasan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 4/ 01-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mahila (Madhepura) P.S. Case No.03 of 2015 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 498-A/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura.

By order dated 25.08.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No.25103 of 2015, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was already dismissed as withdrawn by this Court. Petitioner is present in Chambers.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52438 of 2017 (4) dt.01-02-2018 2/2 Opposite Party No.2 is also present in Chambers. She submits that petitioner has performed another marriage and is living with his second wife.

It has been submitted by the counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 that in the instant case after submission of charge-sheet cognizance has been taken. The processes under Section 82 Cr. P.C. has been issued against the petitioner by order dated 28.02.2017. Certified copy of the aforesaid order has been produced during hearing of this application. In view of such, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

Petitioner may surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed off in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T