Allowed

Pritam Kumar Mehta @ Pritam Mehta v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC3 Jan 2014CR. MISC./16/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to a petitioner accused under Section 498A IPC regarding dowry torture. The order was contingent upon filing a verified petition, paying interim maintenance, and surrendering for arrest within four weeks if arrested. It also allowed the couple to live together if the wife accepted the petitioner's written offer.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail with conditions of maintenance payment, surrender, and court presence; allowed resumption of joint life if wife accepts in writing.

Pritam Kumar Mehta @ Pritam Mehta Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.16 of 2014

¶2

====================================================== Pritam Kumar Mehta @ Pritam Mehta son of Kripanand Mehta, resident of Mohalla- Shree Nagar, Hata, Police Station- K.Nagar, District- Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Meenakshi Rani daughter of Kamleshwari Mehta, resident of villageKhabdah, P.O.- Kanhaili, P.S.-Narpatganj and District- Araria. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar no.2 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 03-01-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶4

The petitioner, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, is named accused in the case being the husband of the complainant-opposite party no.2 with allegation of demand of dowry torture etc. and having illicit relation with another lady.

¶5

Submission is of false implication under some confusion. However, the petitioner is ready to resume and continue the matrimonial relationship with the complainantopposite party no.2, who is his one and only wife. To further strengthen his intention, he is ready to pay a sum of Rs. 1500/(fifteen hundred only) by way of interim maintenance, subject to

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16 of 2014 (2) dt.03-01-2014

¶7

¶8

any order on the point by the competent Court.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of filing duly verified petition supported with personal affidavit before the court below clearly stating all such intentions, as stated above and begin with the payment, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks, let above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, in Complaint Case no.678 (C) of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down u/s 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition to remain physically present before the court below on each and every date at least for two years or till disposal of the case, whichever is earlier and in case of failure on six consecutive dates without giving any reasonable explanation or even on single default in payment or on any violation of the undertaking, the liberty granted shall be deemed to be cancelled.

¶10

It is further made clear that in the event complainantopposite party no.2 accepts the offer in writing by filing due application supported with personal affidavit, the court below shall permit the couple to go and live together at the place of

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16 of 2014 (2) dt.03-01-2014

¶12

¶13

their choice and to report on the date fixed for the purpose and thereafter on being satisfied of their conduct, appropriate order , in accordance with law, may be passed.

¶14

(Akhilesh Chandra, J)

¶15

singh/-

Pritam Kumar Mehta @ Pritam Mehta v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pritam Kumar Mehta @ Pritam Mehta 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

Gajendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Agrawal @ Rajesh Agrawal @ Babu Bhai Vs The State Of Bihar

Bhola Sao Vs The State Of Bihar

Samir Paswan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vinay Yadav and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Kaurav Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar