Allowed

Pappu Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC27 Jun 2019CR. MISC./76951/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail in a case alleging dowry harassment and torture under Section 498A IPC disposed of on condition of monthly maintenance payment and cooperation with family court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail upon surrender, furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, paying Rs.5000 monthly maintenance, and cooperating with family court orders.

Pappu Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76951 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1989 Year-2017 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Pappu Kumar, Son of Late Rabindra Pandit, resident of Village- Bastijalal, Police Station- Dighwara, District- Saran at Chapra.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Lakshmi Kumari, wife of Pappu Kumar, resident of Village- Bastijalal, Police Station- Dighwara, District- Saran at Chapra. At Present D/o Badri Pandit, Resident of Mohalla- Chauhatta Chhipi Tola, P.S.- Hajipur Town, District- Vaishali at Hajipur.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Udai Shankar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Madhuranand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 27-06-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.1989 of 2017 disclosing offences under Sections 498A, 406, 379, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶12

Allegation as per complaint petition against the petitioner is of demand of motorcycle and colour T.V. due to non-fulfillment of said demand, she was subjected to torture with cruelty and ousted from her matrimonial house.

¶13

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the whole allegation is false and concocted. He is still ready to keep her with dignity and care. It further appears from the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76951 of 2018(4) dt.27-06-2019 2/3

¶15

perusal of the record that on appearance of opposite party no.2, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation & Reconciliation Center, but the report at Flag “Q” disclosed that the mediation failed. He further submitted that opposite party no.2 is not ready to reside with the petitioner.

¶16

Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also, who has submitted that due to torture she is not ready to reside with the petitioner and she is ready to one time settlement. Further submission is that she has not been given any maintenance by the petitioner till date.

¶17

Having heard both sides, considering the above submission, this application is disposed of with the condition that if the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.5000/- per month to the opposite party no.2, he may surrender before the trial court and on that, the trial court shall release him on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Complaint Case No.1989 of 2017, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition that he shall continue to pay Rs.5000/per month to the opposite party no.2 for a period of one year and

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76951 of 2018(4) dt.27-06-2019 3/3

¶19

during that period, it is expected that the opposite party no.2 shall file a case for maintenance before the Family Court, Vaishali at Hazipur, the petitioner shall co-operate in disposal of the same and the petitioner shall abide by any interim or final order passed by the Family Court.

¶20

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

¶21

Sunil Shukla/-

¶22

U T

Pappu Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Kumar 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

Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Deepak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anand Prakash Singh Vs The State of Bihar and Anr.

Harendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Suraj Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Jai Narayan Yadav and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar