Ranjeet Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32947 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1590 Year- 2011 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Ranjeet Singh, Son of Bhuneshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Larua, P.SO.P. Halai, District Samastipur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Soni Kumari, D/o Ganesh Prasad Singh, Resident of Village Husena Ragho, P.S.- Vaishali, District- Vaishali.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan Kumar For the S t a t e : Mr. Anil Kumar(APP) For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-10-2015 On the last occasion, learned counsels for the parties appearing in Chambers along with the petitioner had agreed in the presence of O.P. No.2 that all ornaments and other materials belonging to O.P. No.2 shall be returned by the petitioner till 5th October, 2015 and the matter be posted in Chambers so that the matter may be resolved amicably.

Today, O.P. No.2 is present in Chambers along with the learned counsel appearing on her behalf. However, neither the learned counsel for the petitioner is present nor has the petitioner come to appear before this Court.

In view of the fact that this Court had directed that all

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32947 of 2015 (5) dt.05-10-2015 2/2 ornaments and other materials belonging to O.P. No. 2 be returned by 5th October, 2015, it appears that there is no such intention on the part of the petitioner. The behaviour of the petitioner is such that he is not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail as he has stated in paragraph 11 of the petition that he is ready to keep his wife with full honour and dignity. O.P. No.2 is fully ready to go with him. The petitioner on the last date was, however, not ready to take O.P. No.2 to her matrimonial home. The petitioner is thus guilty of having made a false affidavit before this Court. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the order dated 17.8.2015 passed in favour of the petitioner is withdrawn and the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, thus, stands rejected.

(Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U T