Pramod Bind @ Pramod Vind v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68270 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2017 Thana- NALANDA COMPLAINT CASE District- Nalanda ====================================================== Pramod Bind @ Pramod Vind, Son of Arvind Bind @ Arvind Vind, Resident of Village Gangavigha @ Gangabigha, Police Station- Chandi, DistrictNalanda at Biharsharif. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar 2.

Kari Devi, Wife of Pramod Bind @ Pramod Vind, Resident of Village Gangavigha @ Gangabigha, Police Station- Chandi, District- Nalanda at Biharsharif Daughter of Late Rambali Bind @ Rambali Vind Presently residing at Village- Bhadaru Vigha, Police Station Nagarnausa, DistrictNalanda at Biharsharif. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 61 C of 2017 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Allegation against the petitioner is that he demanded Rs.1 lac and a motorcycle from the complainant and for that he subjected the complainant to cruelty and ousted her from the house.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has falsely been implicated in this case as there is no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68270 of 2018(5) dt.15-07-2019 2/2 demand of dowry. None appears for opposite party No.2. On appearance of opposite party No.2 the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre vide order dated 10.4.2019 as there was submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that he was still ready to keep the complainant with him and the report of the Mediator at Flag 'A' disclosed that both the parties as well as their learned counsel were absent and in absence of them the mediation could not proceed, as such failed.

Heard learned APP also.

In view of above facts and circumstances and also considering the conduct of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He may surrender and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered on its own merit.

With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T