Meghnath Singh @ Meghnath Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64658 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2018 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Meghnath Singh @ Meghnath Kumar Son of Amol Singh Resident of VillageMatiya Dharam Daspur, P.S. Desari, Distt.-Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Anzali Kumari, wife of Megnath Singh, Resident of village- Matiya Dharam Daspur, P.S.- Desari, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Smt. Reena Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-09-2019 The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dasari P. S. Case No. 120 of 2018 registered under Sections 323, 341, 498A and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner was married to O.P.No. 2 in February, 2014 and after some time, he along with other accused persons started demanding motorcycle and due to non-fulfillment of demand, petitioner and others tortured the informant mentally and physically. It appears that matter was referred to mediation but mediation between the parties failed and a report to this effect has been submitted by the learned Mediator dated 16.06.2019 and with the intervention of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter was kept in Chamber of this Court by order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64658 of 2018(12) dt.04-09-2019 2/3 02.07.2019 in order to explore the possibility of amicable settlement between the parties.
On 12.07.2019, both petitioner as well as O.P.No. 2 i.e., informant, appears in Chamber before this court and both parties agreed to live together as husband and wife and petitioner undertook to take his wife to Tripur in Tamilnadu and requested that the case may be kept after some time to enable him to arrange confirmed ticket of railway for Tripur in order to take his wife and child there along with him. However, when the matter was again taken up on 19.07.2019, petitioner informed this Court that confirmed ticket for Tripur (Tamilnadu) was not available right now and within a period of further ten days, he would arrange a confirm ticket for Tripur. Accordingly, matter was kept on 05.08.2019.
On 05.08.2019, the matter was adjourned due to nonappearance of both parties and was fixed on 26.08.2019 and on 26.08.2019, none of the parties i.e., petitioner as well as O.P.No. 2, appeared before this Court, however, learned counsel for the petitioner was present.
Today, when the matter is listed and has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the O.P.No. 2 are present but neither petitioner nor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64658 of 2018(12) dt.04-09-2019 3/3 O.P.No. 2 is present before this Court. The petitioner has also not complied with his undertaking given to this Court with regard to the fact that he would inform the Court along with confirm ticket of Tirpur at Tamilnadu to take the informant there for living as husband and wife.
In view of the aforesaid and taking into consideration of the fact that petitioner being husband demanded dowry and as per allegation he tortured the informant mentally and physically and also petitioner did not fulfill his undertaking to come with confirm ticket of Tripur, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) sujit/- U T