Raju Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29091 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1139 Year-2018 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVaishali ====================================================== RAJU SAH S/o Kishorei Sah R/o Village- Harauli Bhathi, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar 2.

Rani Devi W/o Raju Sah R/o Village- Harauli Bhathi, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali. Present Address D/o Dev Sharan Sah, Resident of VillageBaijalpur Kesho (Naya Tola), P.S.- Sonepur, District- Saran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vasant Vikas For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-07-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Saran Complaint Case No. 1139 of 2018 (Trial No. 4520 of 2020) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

Both parties are ready to settle the dispute. Without going into the merits of the matter, let the petitioner above named be released on provisional bail for a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29091 of 2022(2) dt.20-07-2022 2/2 to the court concerned on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1139 of 2018 (Trial No. 4520 of 2020).

The court below is directed to make suitable effort for the purpose of conciliation between the parties. The petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 would have the opportunity to work out an amicable resolution of the issue. If an amicable resolution is worked out within three months, petitioner would be entitled to confirmation of his provisional bail.

If, on the other hand, the issue is not resolved between the parties, the Court below, needless to say, would be well within its jurisdiction to exercise its judicial discretion and pass appropriate orders, which may include cancellation of the petitioner's provisional bail.

This application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkr/- U T