Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31549/2017disposed

Mukesh Kumar Yadav v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-11-08Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31549 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year- Thana- District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar Yadav Son of Sukhdeo Yadav, R/o Bagha Kol Tetaria, P.S.- Ara Mufassil, District- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Priyanka Yadav, W/o Mukesh Kumar Yadav, D/o Deenanath Yadav, R/o Village- Marha, P.S.- Barhara, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. SMT. INDU BALA PANDEY ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-11-2017 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

The present application has been filed for modification of order dated 13.4.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43880 of 2016. The petitioner being the husband of the informant was granted anticipatory bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 498A and 506/34 of the IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on submission and statement made in the main petition that the petitioner is ready to keep the informant as wife with full dignity and honour and on the informant having declined to accept the offer, alternatively, the petitioner being ready to make payment of Rs.2500/- per month to the informant from June, 2017 by depositing the same in the bank account of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31549 of 2017(3) dt.08-11-2017 2/2 informant by second week of every succeeding month. The aforesaid payment was subject to any order being passed in matrimonial, maintenance proceeding or any other collateral proceeding.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is earning only Rs.8000/- per month. Be that as it may, since the monthly payment which the petitioner was ready to pay to the informant is subject to any order being passed in matrimonial, maintenance proceeding or any other collateral proceeding, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the initial order. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek remedy before the appropriate forum. With the aforementioned observation/direction, this application is disposed of.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) anil/- U