Ramakant Yadav @ Deepak Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.13315 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2016 Thana -PAUTHU District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Ramakant Yadav @ Deepak Kumar, Son of Late Dudheshwer Yadav, Resident of Village-Birua, P.S. Pauthu, District-Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rina Devi, Wife of Ramakant Yadav @ Deepak Kumar, Resident of Village-Birua, P.S. Pauthu, District Aurangabad, Present AddressDaughter of Naresh Singh, Resident of Village-Bhaluahi, P.S. Barun, District-Aurangabad .... .... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. For the State : Mr. For the Opposite Party No.2 : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER --------- 24-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State as also the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pauthu P.S. Case No.81 of 2016 registered under Sections 323, 498A, 379, 341 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The allegation is of torturing and causing assault to the opposite party no.2 by her husband (petitioner) and other in-laws for non fulfillment of the dowry demand and to remove the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13315 of 2017 (4) dt.24-08-2017 2/2 opposite party no.2 from her matrimonial house. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while on the joint prayer, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation Centre, Patna, for settlement of the dispute in between the petitioner and the opposite party no.2, who are husband and wife respectively, but the opposite party no.2 was not ready to live with the petitioner and there was demand by her of cash for one time settlement.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that due to harassment and torture, the opposite party no.2 is not ready to go to her matrimonial house and she wants one time settlement. Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender by him within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Pauthu P.S. Case No.81 of 2016, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T