Sukesh Rai v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4347 of 2015 (2) dt.02-02-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4347 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4380 Year- 2012 Thana -PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPURNIA ====================================================== Sukesh Rai, son of Kanti Rai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sarita Devi, D/o- Subhash Mandal, W/O- Sukesh Rai .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner being husband of the opposite party no. 2 apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 4380 of 2012 in which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Purnea. Without entering into the merit of this case, this petition stands disposed of with direction to petitioner to surrender and seek regular bail before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order to the court concerned and if petitioner does so, the concerned court shall release the petitioner on provisional bail for the period of four

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4347 of 2015 (2) dt.02-02-2015 months on the day of his surrender on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned court and after releasing the petitioner, the concerned court shall issue notice to the petitioner as well as opposite party no. 2 fixing date for conciliation and shall take all possible steps to patch up the dispute of the parties within the above stated period of four months.

It goes without saying that if the concerned court succeeds in his attempt, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner shall be confirmed by the concerned court itself, but if the concerned court fails in his attempt due to rigid and non cooperative approach of the petitioner, the provisional bail granted to him shall not be confirmed by the concerned court and in that event petitioner shall be taken into custody by the concerned court. It is needless to say that, if, the concerned court fails in his attempt due to non cooperative and rigid approach of the opposite party no. 2, the concerned court shall confirm the provisional bail granted to the petitioner.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) SHAHZAD/- U T