Allowed

Kunal Kishore @ Kunal Pandey v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC13 Aug 2015CR. MISC./23648/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case. The court conditioned the bail on a fixed monthly maintenance payment of Rs. 1,500 to the wife, specifying that three consecutive defaults would lead to bail cancellation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on deposit of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, conditioned on monthly maintenance payment of Rs. 1,500 to the complainant.

Kunal Kishore @ Kunal Pandey Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23648 of 2015

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1881 Year- 2014 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== KUNAL KISHORE @ KUNAL PANDEY .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.L.Pandit(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 13-08-2015 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being the husband of the complainant is apprehending arrest in a complaint case wherein process has been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶4

The accusation is of torture for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand. The factum of marriage and birth of two children are admitted facts.

¶5

In pursuance to the notices issued to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 07.07.2015, the petitioner and complainant are present in the court.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant deserted the petitioner after leaving one year

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23648 of 2015 (3) dt.13-08-2015

¶8

2/3

¶9

infant female child, hence to bring up the informant child the petitioner has to perform second marriage but thereafter the complainant resumed conjugal life and gave birth to a male child, thereafter again complainant deserted the petitioner. At present the male child is with the complainant whereas female child is with the petitioner. Statement has been made in para 11 of the petition that the petitioner is still ready to resume the conjugal life.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the complainant that the complainant is not ready to accept the offer of the petitioner as the petitioner has performed second marriage.

¶11

In the circumstances, the petitioner is ready to pay ` 1,500/- per month to the complainant from September, 2015 by depositing the same in the bank account of the complainant by second week of every month.

¶12

The complainant is ready to accept the offer the petitioner and also undertakes to supply her bank account to the petitioner within a period of three weeks by filing the same on affidavit before the learned court below.

¶13

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 ` 10,000/- (ten

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23648 of 2015 (3) dt.13-08-2015

¶15

3/3

¶16

thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1881 of 2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

The present order in no way will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.

¶20

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶21

Amrendra/-

¶22

U T

Kunal Kishore @ Kunal Pandey v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Kishore @ Kunal Pandey 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

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Azad Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar

Arti Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mangan Mandal and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Aditya Raj Vs The State Of Bihar

Panna Lal Prasad Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.