Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58914 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-917 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Son of Late Satya Narayan Sah R/o Naga Road Raxaul, Ward No.22, P.S.- Raxaul, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Juli Kumari Wife of Pramod Kumar, D/o Ramesh Kumar R/o Shahpur, P.S.- Shahpur, District- Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Usha Kumari Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 16-12-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 917(C) of 2022 dated 27.07.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Code of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Vide order dated 11.09.2024, the matter was referred to Patna High Court Mediation Centre in order to explore the feasibility of amicable reconciliation between the parties. Thereafter, the mediation proceeding took place on 25.10.2024 and it reveals that even after best and sincere efforts the dispute between the parties could not be resolved, hence the
2/4 mediation failed. Since the mediation has failed, the matter has again come up before the Bench for consideration of anticipatory bail.
4. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner was married to the opposite party no. 2 on 13.06.2020. It is further alleged that the father of the informant gave Rs. 15 lakh to the petitioner at the time of marriage. After some months of marriage, the petitioner along with his family members started torturing the opposite party no. 2 (complainant) for a four wheeler car. In the meanwhile, opposite party no. 2 gave birth to a child. In the month of October 2021, the in-laws of the opposite party no. 2 asked her to leave her matrimonial house and since then opposite party no. 2 is residing at her paternal house. It is further alleged that family members of the petitioner went to the paternal house of the opposite party no. 2 and assaulted her family members.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner as alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits the allegation of demand of dowry is totally false as the same has been levelled in order to harass the petitioner and his family. It is further submitted that petitioner has filed Divorce
3/4 Case vide no. 432 of 2021 dated 14.12.2021 against the informant in the Court of Principal Judge, Motihari, East Champaran. However, without prejudice to the right and contention of the petitioner and in order to maintain harmony in the family, the petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month to the Opposite Party No. 2 as "living cost".
6. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 accepts the offer so made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner may be directed to deposit the said amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month in the bank account of the Opposite Party No. 2 details of which shall be furnished by learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 to learned counsel for the petitioner within one week from today.
7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact that the offer made by learned counsel for the petitioner has been accepted by learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest / surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10000/- (ten thousand) with two
4/4 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Danapur in connection with Complaint Case No. 917(C) of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as well as the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month in the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2 positively by the 10th of every month starting from the month of January, 2025.
(ii) In the event, the petitioner does not pay the monthly maintenance, as agreed, for two consecutive months, the O.P. No. 2 shall be at liberty to file an application before the court below seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner and the court below shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
(Khatim Reza, J) sankalp/- U T