Adarsh Kumar Singh @ Adarsh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41211 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== ADARSH KUMAR SINGH @ ADARSH KUMAR S/o Devendra Kumar Singh R/o village- Court Devi Garahitir, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S.Case No.31 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the D.P.Act.

Case is under Section 498(A) of the IPC and the petitioner happens to be husband and there is allegation of demand and torture against the petitioner. It fuehrer appears that vide order dated 5.7.2019 the petitioner was granted provisional bail by this Court and as both the parties expressed willingness to explore possibility of living together harmoniously, the matter was referred to the District Meditation Centre, Chapra and the report of the District

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41211 of 2019(4) dt.18-10-2019 2/2 Mediation Centre is now received and kept at flag 'M, from which it appears that the meditation has failed. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that on two dates he has appeared but the Opposite Party No.2 has not appeared and later on as he is working in the Merchant Navy, he had gone out and he could not appear on notice. Above submission has been challenged by the learned counsel for the O.P.no.2 on the ground that this is merely a ploy to delay the proceeding as the petitioner has already been granted provisional bail by this Court and no such plea has been taken before the learned court below and the petitioner has intentionally delaying the case, he is not interested in keeping her .

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides and in view of submission of the parties, this application is dismissed and the provisional bail earlier granted to the petitioner is withdrawn. Petitioner has to surrender and pray for regular bail.

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