Application for anticipatory bail against domestic violence and bigamy charges under Sections 498A and 494 IPC rejected by the High Court, which held that performing a subsequent marriage amounted to mental torture.
None. Bail application rejected by the Hon'ble Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17093 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2018 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaharsa
======================================================
Prabhat Kumar @ Bauwa Pandit, Son of Ramswaroop Pandit Resident of Village - Rampur, PS- Sour Bazar, Distt - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umeshanand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
4 16-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.71C/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 494 of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation against the petitioner as per the First Information Report lodged by Opposite Party No.2, who is wife of the petitioner, is that the marriage of the Opposite Party No.2 was solemnized on 04.07.2014. It has further been alleged that out of wedlock, one child has born. The complainant further alleged that the petitioner subsequently developed illicit relation with one Nisha Kumari and performed second marriage with her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17093 of 2019(4) dt.16-08-2019 2/3
and ousted the complainant-opposite Party No.2 along with her child from her matrimonial home.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case inasmuch as there is no allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2 submits that petitioner has tortured Opposite Party No.2-complainant due to the fact that petitioner had developed illicit relation with another girl with whom he has performed second marriage. Learned counsel, accordingly, submits that performance of second marriage of the petitioner with another lady itself amounts mental torture to the complainant-Opposite Party No.2. Learned counsel further submits that the matter was referred in Mediation but the Mediation between the parties has failed.
After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and taking into consideration the fact that the complainant- Opposite Party No.2 was being tortured by the petitioner due to the fact that he developed illicit relation with another lady with whom he performed marriage and the fact that the petitioner has performed second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage with the complainant-Opposite Party No.2 which itself
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17093 of 2019(4) dt.16-08-2019 3/3
amounts to mental torture to the complainant-opposite Party No.2, accordingly, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as such, this bail application is hereby rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
sanjeev/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner alleged of bigamy and cruelty.
Whether performing a second marriage during subsistence of a first marriage constitutes mental torture sufficient to deny bail.
Prabhat Kumar @ Bauwa Pandit
The State Of Bihar
Mamta Devi
Anil Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
