Indrajit Chouhan v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2378 of 2017 (5) dt.04-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2378 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3013 Year- 2014 Thana -PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPURNIA ====================================================== Indrajit Chouhan, S/o Sri Ram Prasad Chouhan, R/o Village- Babusthan, Sukhanagar, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Supaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Punam Devi, W/o Indrajit Chouhan, D/o Jai Narayan Mahto, R/o VillageRanibari, P.S.- Krityanand Nagar, Srinagar, District- Purnea. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Kumar Mehta, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 04-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 3013 of 2014, registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Purnea.

The accusation is of torturing the complainant-opposite party no. 2 by her husband and in-laws due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also to remove from her matrimonial house. Later on, the complainant-opposite party no. 2 came to know that petitioner has already performed the marriage with another lady.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2378 of 2017 (5) dt.04-09-2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits petitioner is ready to keep his wife-opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honour but the complainant-opposite party no. 2 is not ready to live with this petitioner.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that, in fact, on the joint prayer of complainant-opposite party no. 2 and the petitioner, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Patna High Court, Patna for settlement of dispute in between the petitioner and the complainant-opposite party no. 2, where due to non-cooperation of petitioner and the complainant-opposite party no. 2 the dispute could not be resolved.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T