Allowed

Suman Kumar Bhaskar v. The State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC17 Feb 2020CR. MISC./15435/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application in a matrimonial dispute involving sections of IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner undertook to pay Rs. 7,500 per month as maintenance. The High Court granted bail on furnishing bond and conditional payment of maintenance for six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail upon depositing Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties and undertaking to pay Rs. 7,500 monthly maintenance to opposing party's savings account within six weeks.

Suman Kumar Bhaskar Vs The State of Bihar and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15435 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2018 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Suman Kumar Bhaskar S/o Tapeshwar Prasad R/o Village- Mohanpur, P.S.Punpun, District - Patna.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Namita Kumari W/o Suman Kumar Bhaskar, D/o Vinay Ram R/o VillageChanduara, P.O. - Jattdumari, P.S.- Punpun, Dist. Patna.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

6 17-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The petitioner, husband of Opposite Party No. 2

¶13

apprehends his arrest in Punpun P.S. Case No. 291 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 341, 323, 494, 498(A) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶14

Earlier, vide order dated 05.08.2019, the matter was sent to Mediation Centre of Patna High Court for settlement of dispute between the parties. Thereafter, vide order dated 05.11.2019, two months further time was extended for settlement of dispute. In pursuance thereof, Mediator’s report has been received which is kept at flag ‘N’. From perusal of

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15435 of 2019(6) dt.17-02-2020 2/3

¶16

Mediator’s report dated 12.12.2019, it appears that mediation has failed.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this juncture, the petitioner is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 7,500/- (seven thousand five hundred) per month to Opposite Party No. 2, starting from this month.

¶18

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 7,500/- (seven thousand five hundred) per month , the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Masaurhi (Patna) in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 291 of 2018 on the following conditions:

¶19

(1.) Opposite Party No. 2 would file an affidavit before the court below and bring on record her Saving bank account number for its communication to the petitioner.

¶20

(2.) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid maintenance amount per month in the Saving bank account of the Opposite Party No. 2.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15435 of 2019(6) dt.17-02-2020 3/3

¶22

(3.) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the maintenance amount for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail bond.

¶23

(4.) Petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present, as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶24

(5.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶25

(6.) The aforementioned payment will be subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.

¶26

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶27

vinita/-

¶28

U T

Suman Kumar Bhaskar v. The State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Kumar Bhaskar v. The 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Sanjay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Dhanji Kumar @ Dhananjai Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The State of Bihar

Braj Nandan Prasad @ Brij Nandan Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjit Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar