← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32524/2012dismissed

Deepika Priyanka v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-09-28Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32524 of 2012 ====================================================== Deepika Priyanka, Wife of Sri Deepak Kumar, Resident of Flat No. 301, Hope Arpana Apartment, Indrapuri Colony, Road No. 1 off Ashiyana Road, P.S. Shashtri Nagar, District - Patna, A/P residing at C/o Sri Brajesh Pandey, Choti Baradari Phase-1, Garha Road, Jalandhar, Punjab.. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Deepak Kumar, Son of Late Kamla Prasad Sinha, Resident of Flat No. 301, Hope Aprna Apartment, Indrapuri Colony, Road No. 1, P.S. - Shashtri Nagar, District - Patna.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyendra Narayan Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Roy(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 28-09-2016 The present application has been filed for cancellation of bail of opposite party no. 2, granted vide order dated 25.04.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 15091 of 2012 in connection with Complaint Case No. 938(C) of 2011 wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The opposite party no. 2 being the husband of the complainant was granted provisional bail on the offer of opposite party no. 2 that he was ready to keep the complainantpetitioner as wife with full dignity and honour and the offer was accepted by the complainant-petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32524 of 2012 (2) dt.28-09-2016 2/2 Considering the fact that the provisional bail was granted vide order dated 25.04.2012 for a period of one year and the said period expired on 24.04.2013 and there is nothing on record to suggest that the provisional bail was extended or confirmed by the learned court below, this Court is not inclined to interfere.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

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