Allowed

Amardeep Amar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Apr 2013CR. MISC./666/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a husband facing prosecutions for dowry harassment and cruelty. The order was conditioned on the petitioner paying Rs. 5,000 per month as maintenance to inform serious mental illness from the wife and made her medical treatment was accepted by the informations was not suffering from any mental ailment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs. 5,000 per month maintenance to informant and furnishing bond with sureties.

Amardeep Amar Vs the State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.666 of 2012 (8) dt.12-04-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.666 of 2012

¶3

	====================================================== Amardeep Amar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ======================================================
8	CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-04-2013 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.
	The petitioner being the husband of the informant is
	apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences
	punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
	Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶4

The accusation is of torture for non-fulfilment of the dowry demand. It is admitted that the marriage was performed on 13.05.2011.

¶5

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after the marriage while going to in-laws’ house on 14.05.2011 it was detected that the informant is suffering from some mental abrasion when she was treated by the doctor at Bhagalpur on 15.05.2011 and at Patna on 16.06.2011 which gets reflected from Annexure-2 when an informatory petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner on 21.05.2011 bringing everything in detail when it is claimed that the informant was suffering from mental abrasion

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.666 of 2012 (8) dt.12-04-2013

¶7

prior to the marriage but this fact was concealed from the petitioner’s side when ultimately the petitioner filed Matrimonial Case No. 14 of 2011 on 03.06.2011 for judicial separation and thereafter, the present case was registered on 26.06.2011.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that the informant is not suffering from any mental ailment and has appeared in several examinations even after marriage and secured good marks. Moreover, the DIG has also not found the contention of the petitioner true.

¶9

Though, the matter was referred to the Mediation Center but it appears from the report of the Mediation Center (flag-‘c’) that the mediation has failed.

¶10

It appears that at present the reconciliation is not

¶11

feasible.

¶12

In the circumstances, the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month to the informant from May, 2013 by depositing the same in the bank account of the informant by second week of every month.

¶13

The offer of the petitioner is acceptable to the informant who undertakes to supply her bank account number to the petitioner within a period of three weeks by filing the same on affidavit before the learned court below.

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.666 of 2012 (8) dt.12-04-2013

¶15

Considering the stand of the parties, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, 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, Patna in connection with Rajeev Nagar P.S. Case No. 110 of 2011, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶16

The aforesaid payment will be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial or maintenance proceeding.

¶17

Three consecutive defaults in making payment by the petitioner will give liberty to the informant to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

¶18

The grant of bail to the petitioner will not preclude either party to get the matter reconcile.

¶19

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶20

Amrendra/-

Amardeep Amar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amardeep Amar v. the State of Bihar

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

Shobhakant Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Laxmi Gope Vs The State Of Bihar

Ramjee Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Badri Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Abbas and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Roshan Ram Vs The State Of Bihar