Bibhuti Bhusan Rai @ Bibhuti Bhushan Roy @ Bibhuti Bhusan Ray @ Vibhuti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54514 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-601 Year-2013 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== BIBHUTI BHUSAN RAI @ BIBHUTI BHUSHAN ROY @ BIBHUTI BHUSAN RAY @ VIBHUTI Son of Late Ishwar Prasad Rai Resident of Village- Harpur, P.S- Barauni (Refinery O.P), District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Indu Rai @ Indu Gupta W/o Bibhuti Bhusan Rai@Bibhuti Bhushan Roy@Bibhuti Bhusan Ray@Vibhuti D/o Late Shambhu Charan Prasad Resident of and P.O-New Colony Ullaw (Sawitri Bhawan), Gali No.4, P.SIOC Refinery, District-Begusarai. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J. N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-09-2019 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner, being the husband of the complainant, has renewed the prayer for anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 601C of 2013, wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the learned SDJM, Begusarai. The basic accusation is of torture for non-fulfillment of further dowry demand.

Earlier, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54514 of 2019(2) dt.04-09-2019 2/2 13.07.2015, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 51813 of 2014.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour. Though statement to that effect has not been made in the petition.

Since the petitioner has renewed his prayer for anticipatory bail after four years of earlier rejection, as not pressed, without any fresh ground, this Court is not inclined to consider the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner is rejected.

However, considering the present stand of the petitioner to the effect that he is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour, let the learned Court below consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, if he surrenders before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Ashwini/- U T