Ritesh Kumar Tiwari @ Ritesh Kumar Tiwary @ Ritesh Kr Tiwary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.45933 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -218 Year- 2015 Thana -EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Ritesh Kumar Tiwari @ Ritesh Kumar Tiwary @ Ritesh Kr Tiwary son of Sri Kailash Tiwari, resident of Village- Yadopur Tola Chainpur, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran.
.... .... Petitioner.
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Uday Narayan Tiwari W/o Late Sachidanand Tiwari, null
3. Sindhu Devi daughter of Uday Narayan Tiwari, Both resident of VillageAreraj Jogiyar, P.S.- Gobindganj, District- East Champaran. .... .... Opposite Parties.
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Jai Narain Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the complainant and the State.
The petitioner was earlier granted provisional bail by order dated 06-12-2017. The petitioner was directed, on being released from jail to appear before Mediation Centre on 20-122017 and Mediation Centre will submit report within three months.
From the order dated 04-04-2018, it appears that three months' time given to Mediation Centre has elapsed and the Mediator has not submitted report and thereafter, date was fixed for admission. From the order dated 25-04-2018, it appears that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45933 of 2017 (11) dt.16-05-2018 counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant in which, at paragraph-7, it has been mentioned that the petitioner again assaulted his wife on 24-04-2018 and she was being treated in Motihari Sadar Hospital.
Reply to the statement made by the informant, has been filed.
This court finds from the reply and also submission of the petitioner and conduct of the petitioner that he after being released on provisional bail, is not taking any interest to resolve the matter. The petitioner is misusing the privilege of provisional bail, granted by this court by order dated 06-12-2017. Accordingly, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner by order dated 06.12.2017 is rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below forthwith and if, the petitioner does not surrender, the court below is directed to take appropriate steps against the petitioner for his remand in the case accordance with law. (Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T