Sudhir Pandey @ Mantu Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84352 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2018 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== Sudhir Pandey @ Mantu Pandey S/O Rajendra Pandey R/O Village- Lodipur, P.S- Muffasil, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rinku Devi W/O Sudhir Pandey Residing at Baijnath Pur, P.S- Sirdala, Distt.- Nawada.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Kumari Jyoti, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP For the OP No.2 :

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as also learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. Perused the case diary.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 44 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Sections 498A, 379, 337 & 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3⁄4 of the Dowry Act.

3.

The complainant alleged that after her marriage in 2001, she was subjected to cruelty for dowry and later ousted from her matrimonial home. She lived with her husband in Ghaziabad against his will but faced further mistreatment due to his alleged affair. On 28-08-2014, she was assaulted, her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84352 of 2024(3) dt.25-02-2025 2/3 belongings were taken.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 09-09-2024. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent/s, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Nawada, based on a settlement where he agreed to keep OP No.2 with dignity and pay Rs. 3,000/- per month, which he duly complied with. Despite his efforts, the OP No.2 left him after five months and started living with another man, engaging in an adulterous relationship. The petitioner repeatedly tried to convince her to return for the sake of their daughter, but she refused, yet he continued financial support until April, 2019. However, the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled on 1207-2023 without considering the full facts and circumstances of the case.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that there is maintenance

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84352 of 2024(3) dt.25-02-2025 3/3 case pending between the parties.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and period of custody of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 44 of 2018.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T