Petitioner sought to be exonerated from monthly undertaking payments granted during anticipatory bail. Court dismissed the application, noting initial bail conditions made payment subject to future matrimonial or maintenance orders.
Application to exonerate petitioner from monthly undertaking payments dismissed.
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.42296 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3896 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-525 Year-2013 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya
======================================================
Amaresh Yadav S/o Saryu Yadav, R/o Vill.- Sonarkhap, P.S.- Tankuppa, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Syed Asgher Najmi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Smt. Pronati Singh ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 19.2.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No.3896 of 2015 to the extent of exonerating the petitioner from making payment of monthly undertaken amount to the complainant.
The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner being husband of the complainant in the complaint case wherein process was directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494 and 109 of the IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, preferred Cr. Misc. No. 3896 of 2015 with a prayer for anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42296 of 2018(5) dt.10-07-2019 2/2
and the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail on the undertaking to the effect that he is ready to make payment of Rs.4000/- per month to the complainant O.P. No. 2 from March, 2015. The said payment was subject to any order being passed in matrimonial or maintenance proceeding.
It appears that similar modification application filed by the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 8.2.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2960 of 2017.
This application is devoid of merit since the initial order granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner stipulates that the payment is subject to any order being passed in matrimonial or maintenance proceeding.
This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
anil/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application to modify the order to exonerate the petitioner from making monthly undertaking payments is maintainable.
Whether the stipulation that payment is subject to orders in matrimonial or maintenance proceedings bars the present modification claim.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Amaresh Yadav
State Of Bihar
Ramrati Devi
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
