Md. Adil Hussain v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8636 of 2017 (4) dt.18-08-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8636 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -121 Year- 2016 Thana -KAUAKOL District- NAWADA ====================================================== Md. Adil Hussain, S/o Md. Salim, resident of Village- Bukar, Police Station- Kawakole, District- Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Gulnaz Begam, D/o Md. Ekwal Arju, R/o Bukar, P.S.- Kauwakol, District- Nawada.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kanwakol P.S. Case No. 121 of 2016, registered under Sections 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada.

The accusation is of torturing the informant-opposite party no. 2 by her husband and in-laws due to non-fulfillment of demand of four-wheeler vehicle and also to remove from her matrimonial house.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing the divorce case bearing Matarimonial Suit No. 103 of 2016

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8636 of 2017 (4) dt.18-08-2017 by the petitioner against his wife-opposite party no. 2, opposite party no. 2 has filed the present case only to give undue pressure. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, submits that while the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Patna High Court, Patna, on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 to settle their dispute but the dispute could not be settled due to rigidness of the petitioner.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T