Nirmal Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65803 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2017 Thana- BIHIA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Nirmal Ram, Son of Bishwanath Raim Resident of Village-Doghra,Police Station Behiya,Distt.-Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar

2. Rekha Devi, wife of Nirmal Ram.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rahul Nath For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Behiya P.S. Case No. 279 of 2017, registered under Sections 498(A), 341, 323, 504 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-5, Bhojpur at Ara. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the joint prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite party no.2, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Patna High Court, Patna, for settlement of dispute in between the petitioner and the opposite party no.2, who are husband and wife but due to some personal difficulty, petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65803 of 2018(5) dt.17-08-2019 2/2 did not appear before the Mediation Centre, Patna High Court, due to that reason, mediation could not be succeeded but petitioner is still ready to keep his wife-opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honour.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that while the opposite party no. 2 was present on each date before the Mediation Centre, Patna High Court, Patna but the petitioner did not appear due to that reason mediation could not be succeeded.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T