Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumarj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72828 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-783 Year-2018 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumarj S/o Sri Munna Sharma R/o VillageRajbigha, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Putul Devi W/o Dhirendra Sharma R/o Village- Rajbigha, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya. At present residence of Village- Khushahalpur, P.S.- Khizarsarai, Post- Sarbahda, District- Gaya.

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Kanhaiya Kishore, APP For Opp. Party No.2 :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.783 of 2018 registered for offences under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application as the mediation failed. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 says that she wanted to make one time settlement of the dispute as the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72828 of 2019(5) dt.25-04-2022 2/2 petitioner has remarried and therefore, he avoided to restore matrimonial relationship.

Considering the above submissions of the parties. If the opposite party no.2 has any grievance with regard to remarriage by the petitioner, she should have approached the police by invoking Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

On asking the question as to whether opposite party no.2 has filed any application for maintenance in the Family Court, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 informed this Court that the opposite party no.2 has not filed any application for maintenance. If the parties are not availing their legal remedy and they are not aware of their rights, this Court cannot help them.

This application is permitted to be withdrawn. (Sandeep Kumar, J) BT/- U T