Kumari Sarika v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55572 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2015 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda ====================================================== Kumari Sarika, W/o Gulshan Kumar, D/o Suresh Prasad, R/o Vill.- Durgapur, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State of Bihar 2.

Gulshan Kumar, S/o Krishna Prasad, R/o Mohalla- Jhanjhari Gali, Bandhan Ram, Bhadani Path, P.S.- Jhumri Telaiya, District- Kodarma Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mahendra Thakur, Adv.

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.

For the O. P. No.2 :

Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, Adv.

For the State :

Md. Sufiyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-09-2019 The present application has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to opposite party no.2, vide order dated 08.08.2016, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39811 of 2015 in connection with Giriyak P.S. Case No. 133 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 379, 323, 324 and 307/34 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nalanda at Biharsharif. Opposite party no.2, being the husband of the informant was granted anticipatory bail on the readiness to make payment of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the informant from September, 2016, by second week of every succeeding month.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55572 of 2018(5) dt.19-09-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present application, for cancellation of anticipatory bail of opposite party no.2, has been filed since initially opposite party no.2 was not complying the undertaking of making monthly payment of Rs. 4,000/- to the informant, given before this Court, but now, just two days ago, the opposite party no.2 has made upto-date payment till August, 2019, though the petitioner is still apprehensive that again in future, opposite party may make default in making payment and in that circumstances, the petitioner would have to move this Court again. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that since the father of opposite party no.2 is suffering from carcinoma and is undergoing treatment, hence, payment has been made with some delay, though henceforth, he further undertakes to comply the undertaking, given before this Court while granting bail, regularly.

In that view of the matter, the present application has become infructuous.

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Amrendra/- U T