Allowed

Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC7 Oct 2013CR. MISC./41669/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in two matrimonial cases involving Section 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court held that no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail as the dispute is matrimonial and the complainant was ready to resolve it amicably.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties in both Criminal Misc. No. 41637 of 2013 and Cr. Misc. No. 41669 of 2013.

Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41637 of 2013 (2) dt.07-10-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.41637 of 2013
======================================================
Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
State Of Bihar & Anr
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Miscellaneous No.41669 of 2013
======================================================
Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
State Of Bihar & Anr
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.41637 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kanihiya Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate
& Mr. Radha Mohan Singh
For the State : Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, APP
For the Informant : Mrs. Bela Singh
(In Cr.Misc. No.41669 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kanihiya Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate
& Mr. Radha Mohan Singh
For the State : Mr. Pushpa Sinha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI
SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 07-10-2013 Heard learned senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned counsel for the Informant.

¶4

Criminal Misc. No. 41637 of 2013 arises out complaint Case No. 1753 of 2012 which has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶5

Cr. Misc. No. 41669 of 2013 has been filed for

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41637 of 2013 (2) dt.07-10-2013

¶7

grant of regular in connection with Muzaffarpur Mahila P.S. case No. 04 of 2012.

¶8

Petitioner is accused in both the cases as husband of the Rupa Kumari who is complainant in the first case and informant in the second case. The allegation as regards demand of dowry or torture therefor, in both the cases are common. However, in Muzaffarpur Mahila P.S. case No. 04 of 2012, there is additional allegation, constituting offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner seeks regular bail in both the cases.

¶9

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of both the cases has submitted that out of matrimonial dispute between the parties, petitioner instituted a divorce suit No. 33 of 2012 in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur in which case notices had been issued and notice has been published in the daily newspaper also. After issuance of notice the complaint case came to be filed on 27.6.2012 and the police case on 3.7.2013. He submits that the dispute between the parties arises out of apparent acrimony in their matrimonial life and the allegation of torture and demand of dowry are false and malicious.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41637 of 2013 (2) dt.07-10-2013

¶12

informant on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. She submits that the informant is still ready to live with the petitioner if she is kept with love, respect and dignity.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of dispute between the parties, I do not find any purpose is going to be served if the petitioner is allowed to remain in jail. Let petitioner Mukul Kumar alias Mukund Kumar be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- ( Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Complaint case No. 1753 of 20012 and Muzaffarpur Mahila P.S. case No. 04 2012 respectively.

¶14

It is indicated that the parties will be free to make endeavour to resolve their dispute amicably through the process of conciliation before the learned Family Court where the divorce suit is pending and it is expected that learned Family Court will make best efforts, in view of the wish of the complainant/informant so that the dispute is resolved amicably. These applications are allowed with the observation

¶15

aforesaid.

¶16

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)

¶17

Arun Kumar/-

Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukul Kumar @ Mukund Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Arshad Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna Singh @ Vijay Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Indradeo Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Pramod Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajendra Kuwar Vs The State Of Bihar

Ganesh Sao Vs The State Of Bihar