Kartik Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57413 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-373 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Jamui ====================================================== Kartik Kumar S/o Late Umesh Prasad Burnwal R/o Village- Purani Bazar, Near Gandhi Chowk, Jhajha, P.S.-Jhajha, District-Jamui ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mughda Kumari @ Mughda Burnwal W/o Kartik Kumar R/o VillagePurani Bazar, Near Gandhi Chowk, Jhajha, P.S.-Jhajha, District-jamui at Present Ashish Kumar Burnwal brother of complainant Village- Purani Bazar, Near Gandhi Chowk, Jhajha, P.S.-Jhajha, District-jamui ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Yatindra Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP For the O.P. No. 2 :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Bhardwaj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second anticipatory bail application of the petitioner with a prayer to grant him pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 373 (C) of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Earlier his prayer was rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.08.2023.
4. Today, learned counsel for the parties have placed before this Court a copy of the order dated 29.04.2025 passed in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57413 of 2024(3) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 Cr. Misc. No. 69824 of 2023. It is stated that both the parties have resolved their dispute in course of hearing of the said application. It is recorded in the order dated 29.04.2025 that both the parties are present in person with their learned Advocates. It is jointly submitted by parties that "they are now living together happily."
5. A perusal of the order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 69824 of 2023 would show that there is an interim order dated 06.02.2025. This Court has been informed that the order of "no coercive action" against the petitioner is still in existence.
6. In the aforesaid view of the matter, this Court finds that there is no apprehension of arrest to the petitioner.
7. This petition for anticipatory bail has become infructuous and is being disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T