Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57643 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas ====================================================== JYOTI KUMARI W/o Shri Shyam Pandey, D/o Shri Krishn Mohan Dubey Resident of village - New Area, Patel Gali, ward no. 7, P.O. - Dalmiya Nagar, P.S. - Dehri, Distt. - Rohtas. At Present residing at Village and P.S. - Nauhatta, Distt. - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shyam Pandey Son of Shri Satendra Pandey Resident of Mohalla - New Area, Patel Gali, ward no. 7, P.O. - Dalmiya Nagar, P.S. - Dehri, Distt. - Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Nitesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Chhotelal Mishra, Advcoate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-01-2024 Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Nitesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Chhotelal Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned APP for the State.

2. This application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner to cancel the bail bond of opposite party no.2, who was granted bail vide order dated 12.12.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.66459 of 2019.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in the order granting bail to the opposite party no.2, it is recorded that petitioner/opposite party no.2 is ready to keep his wife with full honour and dignity and to this effect he had also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57643 of 2023(6) dt.19-01-2024 2/2 filed a compromise petition before the Mediation Center of this Court. He further submits that it is bizarre that the opposite party no.2 never turned to receive his wife (petitioner) from her Maika rather the petitioner has knowledge that opposite party no.2 has performed second marriage during the lifetime of his legally wedded wife i.e. the petitioner. Hence, the bail granted to opposite party no.2 may be cancelled.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find no ground to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

5. It goes without saying that the order dated 12.12.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.66459 of 2019 is self explanatory and the petitioner may take appropriate steps in accordance with law as she is advised.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T