Allowed

Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC26 Nov 2018CR. MISC./57853/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed provisional anticipatory bail to a petitioner facing Dowry Act. 498A IPC charges, conditioned on his undertaking to resume conjugal life and restore marital harmony to the satisfaction of the lower court within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Provisional anticipatory bail for six months, subject to undertaking to resume conjugal life and key conditions for confirmation by the Court below.

Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.57853 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-734 Year-2017 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE District- Madhubani

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav, Son of Pulkit Yadav, Resident of Ram Nagar, PSAread Distt- Madhubani.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar.

¶8

Sarita Kumari, W/o Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav, D/o Yamuna Prasad, R/o Paliwarkis, P.S.- Ramnagar, Distt- Madhuban.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Soban Asghar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 26-11-2018

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant-opposite party no. 2 and Mr. J.N. Thakur, learned counsel for the State.

¶12

The petitioner, being the husband of the complainant is apprehending his 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 Sections ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶13

The prosecution case as per the complaint is that the marriage between the petitioner and the complainant was performed on 21.05.2014 but subsequently, further dowry demand of a Sumo car was made and due to non-fulfillment of

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57853 of 2018(3) dt.26-11-2018 2/4

¶15

the same the torture was inflicted on the complainant and subsequently, the issue was reconciled between the parties but after some time the accused persons after snatching her belongings, drove her out from the matrimonial house, leading to filing of the complaint petition.

¶16

The petitioner and the complainant are present in the

¶17

Court.

¶18

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner admits his marriage with the complainant and is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour, though, statement to that effect has not been made in the petition.

¶19

From the impugned order it appears that similar submission was made before the learned Court below when the complainant appeared and expressed her willingness to resume the conjugal life but petitioner declined to take her to matrimonial house.

¶20

However, it is submitted that now the petitioner has changed his stand and is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour.

¶21

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant is ready to accept the offer, but she is apprehensive

¶22

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57853 of 2018(3) dt.26-11-2018 3/4

¶23

that petitioner is making such misleading statement only in order to obtain the bail.

¶24

Considering the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is inclined to allow the parties to make effort to resume the conjugal .

¶25

Both sides agree to appear before the learned Court below on 10^th of December, 2018 when the petitioner will take the complainant to her matrimonial house to keep her as wife with full dignity and honour.

¶26

Considering the present stand of the parties, let the above named petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail for six months, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of twelve 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 learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with C.R. No. 734 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶27

The provisional bail of the petitioner will be confirmed by the learned Court below in three eventualities (I) if the matrimonial harmony is substantially restored, or (ii) if the complainant fails to appear before the learned Court below, or

¶28

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57853 of 2018(3) dt.26-11-2018 4/4

¶29

(iii) if the complainant gets reluctant to reconcile the issue.

¶30

However, the provisional bail will not be confirmed

¶31

by the learned Court below if the petitioner fails to comply the

¶32

undertaking given before this Court.

¶33

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶34

DKS/-

¶35

U T

Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Yadav @ Lalit Yadav 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

Bhagwat Upadhyay Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sudhir Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Angad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Najmul Haque @ Najmul Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Alok Bharti Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Jyoti Raj Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.