Santosh Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62002 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA PS District- East Champaran ====================================================== SANTOSH KUMAR MAHTO Son of Hiralal Mahto Resident of Village - Piprakothi, P.S.- Piprakothi, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party.

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Tondon, Advocate.

For the State :

Ms. Nirmala Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State as also the learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.10 of 2019 registered under Sections 341, 342, 323, 506, 504, 406, 307, 498A and 494/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the joint prayer, earlier, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation and Reconciliation Centre, Patna, for mediation and settlement of the dispute in between the petitioner and the informant, who are husband and wife, where the matter was resolved in between them in terms of the memorandum of agreement dated 09.12.2019, which is the part

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62002 of 2019(4) dt.06-02-2020 2/2 of the report dated 09.12.2019 of the Mediator, Patna High Court Mediation and Reconciliation Centre, Patna, and, accordingly, both decided to live together.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submits that after mediation and settlement of the dispute in between the petitioner and the informant before the Patna High Court Mediation and Reconciliation Centre, Patna, while the informant had gone to her matrimonial house but her husband and parents-in-law did not allow her to live there. 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.10 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U