Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19186/2017rejected

Badal Yadav v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-07-11Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19186 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Badal Yadav S/o Dinesh Yadav resident of Village - Fudaki Chak Patraun, P.S. Gogari Jamalpur, District - Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Minakshi Kumari D/o Babulal Yadav W/o Badal Yadav resident of Village - Lattipur, P.S. - Bihpur, District - Bhagalpur. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mahila (Naugachia) P.S. Case No. 04/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The informant alleged that she was married to the petitioner in the year 2014, but after five months of marriage, the petitioner and other in-laws started torturing her for demand of Rs. 1 lacs. On 09.11.2015, the petitioner solemnized second marriage. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to keep his wife. The petitioner was also present

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19186 of 2017 (3) dt.11-07-2017 2/2 along with his wife in the court below, but wife herself shows her unwillingness and refused to live with the petitioner. It appears that the informant made allegation before the Sessions Judge that her husband has already solemnized second marriage, therefore, she is not willing to live with her husband.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that the petitioner has already solemnized second marriage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Rakhi U T