Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30946/2016bail granted

Ram Autar Das v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-07-26Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30946 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -195 Year- 2015 Thana -SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Ram Autar Das Son of Sitaram Das resident of Village-Bahera @ Bairaha, P.S.-Bathnaha, District-Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Radha Devi W/o Ram Autar Das D/o Soman Das, R/o village- Benipur, P.S. - Aurai, District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashhar Mustafa For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being the husband of the complainant is languishing in jail since 24.05.2016 in a complaint case wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC. The basic accusation is of torture.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner admits his marriage with the complainant on 20.05.2013 but subsequent to the marriage the petitioner came to know the complainant was already married with one Santosh Das hence the petitioner filed Matrimonial Case No. 184 of 2014 on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30946 of 2016 (2) dt.26-07-2016 2/2 5.11.2014 with a prayer for divorce. Thereafter the present complaint was filed on 12.02.2015. It is further submitted that now the complainant has performed third marriage. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that petitioner has also performed second marriage. Hence the complaint wants that her belongings along with the money which was spent in the marriage should be returned. Considering the filing of Matrimonial Suit at earlier point of time and this fact has not been disputed controverted by learned counsel for the complaint that complainant has performed two marriage apart from marriage performed with the petitioner, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousands) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Sitamarhi in connection with Complaint case CI-195 of 2015. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) siddharth/- U