Raushan Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55253 of 2016 ====================================================== Raushan Kumar, Son of Late Lal Bihari Singh, Resident of Mohalla- New Phadpur Police Colony, Anishabad, Police Station- Gardnibagh, DistrictPatna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Munita Kumari , W/o Raushan Kumar D/o Sri Ravindra Nath Sinha, Resident of Mohalla New Pahadpur Police Colony Anishabad, P.S. Gardanibagh, District- Patna at present Quarter No. B- 1981, Sector- 2, Side-4, Dhurva Ranchi, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand). .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nalin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-01-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, complainant and the State.

The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 08.07.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24815 of 2015 to the extent of extending the period of provisional anticipatory bail.

The petitioner being husband of the complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail for one year in a complaint case wherein process were directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was granted bail on readiness of the petitioner to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour. Though statement to that effect was not made in the petition.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55253 of 2016 (2) dt.18-01-2017 2/2 The provisional bail of the petitioner was to be confirmed by learned Court below in three eventualities (i) on substantial restoration of matrimonial harmony or (ii) if the complainant gets reluctant to reconcile the issue or (iii) if the complainant fails to appear before learned Court below.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to the order of this Court, the learned Court below was directed to issue notice to the complainant but still the notices have not been issued. Hence, the issue could not be reconciled.

Considering the fact that provisional bail of the petitioner lapsed on 07.07.2016 when the present modification application has been filed on 21.12.2016 much after expiry of the period of provisional bail, this Court is not inclined to modify the earlier order. Let learned Court below consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, keeping in view of the nature of accusation, if the petitioner surrenders within a period of six weeks in connection with Complaint Case No. 1653C of 2013, pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna.

Accordingly the modification application is disposed off.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Shageer/- U T