Sumesh Ram v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53456 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2017 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sumesh Ram, S/o Baluch Ram, R/o Vill.- Mohanpur, P.S.- Pipardhi, Distt.- Sheohar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Reena Devi, W/o Sumesh Ram, R/o Vill.- Mahanpur, P.S.- Piparadhi, Distt.- Sheohar at present residing at Vill.- Riga Imali Bazar , P.S.- Riga, Distt.- Sitamarhi.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Smt. Pronati Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Riga P.S. Case No. 283 of 2017, disclosing offences under Sections 498A, 323, 379, 494 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Prosecution story as per the complaint petition is that for demand of one motorcycle from the complainant and for that, subjected her with cruelty and harassment and later on, as the complainant was issue-less, ousted her from the house by snatching her ornaments and the petitioner has married with another lady.

On appearance of the opposite party no. 2, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation & Reconciliation Center, vide order dated 11.02.2019. The report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53456 of 2018(6) dt.02-07-2019 2/3 of Mediator is available on record at Flag "M" which disclosed that the parties failed to resolve their dispute through the process of mediation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is still ready for one time settlement but the demand of opposite party no.2 is excessive.

Heard learned APP as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that opposite party no.2 was ousted from the house and the petitioner has married with another lady. Further submission is that she has not been paid any single penny up till now. The petitioner is a labourer.

Having heard both sides, considering the above facts and circumstances, as stated above, the present application is disposed of with condition that the petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.1500/- per month to the opposite party no.2 for a period of one year. During that period, the opposite party no.2 is at liberty to move before the Family Court for grant of maintenance and the petitioner shall abide by the order either final or interim passed by the Family Court.

With the aforesaid, this application stands allowed and the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53456 of 2018(6) dt.02-07-2019 3/3 dated 20.09.2018 is confirmed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T