Vijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71099 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1249 Year-2021 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Vijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Kumar Mahto S/o Late Raj Kumar Mahto R/o Village- Silothar, P.S.- Jandha, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Renu Devi W/o Vijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Mahto @ Ranvijay Kumar Mahto, D/o Daroga Mahto R/o Village- Silothar, P.S.- Jandaha, District- Vaishali. At present R/o Village- Sirsa Biran, P.S.- Lalganj, District- Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-03-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Learned APP for the State and Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1249 of 2021, registered on 27.07.2021, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but cognizance has been taken only under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution, the complaint has been lodged against five named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation that they have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71099 of 2024(3) dt.22-03-2025 2/3 inflicted torture upon the informant for non-fulfillment of dowry demand.

4. Both Counsel jointly submits that, earlier, vide order dated 11.11.2024, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of the Patna High Court, and the Mediation Report was submitted on 05.02.2025. The report indicates that, despite the best and sincere efforts, the dispute between the parties could not be settled.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as a good gesture, the petitioner offered to pay Rs. 4,000/- (Four Thousand Rupees) per month into the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2.

6. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 submits that she currently does not have a bank account, but at the time of furnishing the bail bond, she will provide the account number before the Trial Court.

7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

8. In the present facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, on being satisfied by the Trial Court that the amount has been deposited into the bank account of Opposite Party No.2, in the event of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71099 of 2024(3) dt.22-03-2025 3/3 arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M.-IX, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1249 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

9. It is hereby made clear that the petitioner shall deposit Rs. 4,000/- (Four Thousand Rupees) per month into the bank account of Opposite Party No. 2, as offered by him in Court as a good gesture. The petitioner shall deposit the said amount before the 15th day of each month. In case of failure to do so for three consecutive months, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

10. The parties shall be free to enter into mediation at any time, before any forum, to resolve any pending litigation between them for a full and final settlement. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T