Shekh Mumtaj v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18442 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -17 Year- 2013 Thana -KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictKATIHAR ====================================================== Shekh Mumtaj Son of Late Matibulla, Resident of Village- Damodarpur, P.S. Azamnagar, District- Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Bibi Lesun Khatoon , wife of Sk. Mumtaj, Resident of VillageDamodarpur, P.S. Azamnagar, District- Katihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Musowir For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Upendra Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2015 This application was heard on 02.07.2015 and order was dictated in Court but before signing of the order, it was detected that the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail has already been rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 26595 of 2014 on 14.11.2014 by a Bench of this Court. Therefore, the present application has been brought today under the heading "To Be Mentioned" at the instance of the Court.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with C.A. Case No. 17 of 2013 registered under Section 498A/34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Katihar, District - Katihar.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18442 of 2015 (3) dt.06-07-2015 2/2 The accusation against the petitioner is to perform remarriage and torturing his wife-complainant, O.P. No.2 and asked to her to bring cash Rs. 50,000/- from her Maika. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner, who is husband of complainantO.P. No.2, is ready to keep his wife, opposite party no.2 with full dignity. It is further submitted that petitioner has performed remarriage with the consent of the complainant-opposite party no.2 prior to 20 years.

The prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner, who is the husband of complainant-opposite party no.2, has already been rejected by a Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 26595 of 2014 on 14.11.2014. As such, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of six weeks and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the Court below on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) Shail/- U T