Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.28953 of 2010 ====================================================== Shahina Praveen W/o Pappu @ Maksud Alam, D/o Mohd. Ekram, R/o Mohalla- Shahibganj, P.S.- University, District- Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Pappu @ Maksud Alam S/o late Mohd. Jalil, R/o Mohalla- Ulfatia Tola Sahebganj, P.S. University (Kotwali) District- Bhagalpur .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. R.B. Roy Raman, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 08-08-2012 After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State, this Court does not find any cogent ground for exercising its powers under section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for cancelling the bail of accused- opposite party no. 2, granted to him by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur by order dated 8.6.2010 passed in A.B.P. No. 303 of 2010. Learned Sessions Judge has recorded a finding of fact that the dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 was referred for conciliation before the Mediation Centre but that failed since the petitioner expressed her unwillingness to live with her husband (opposite party no. 2). In the aforesaid factual background, the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28953 of 2010 (2) dt.08-08-2012 2/3 opposite party no. 2 in a case under [STATUTE] was allowed. In the given facts of the case, no case for cancellation of bail of opposite party no. 2 is made out. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a valid grievance that the complaint petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner in the year, 2009 and, after holding an enquiry under [STATUTE] was taken against the opposite party no. 2 and other accused persons in the year, 2009 itself. The opposite party no. 2 and other accused persons are enjoying the privilege of anticipatory bail and the criminal case is not being taken for its final disposal. In the aforesaid circumstances, the learned trial court is hereby directed to take up the trial of the case, filed by the petitioner, on priority basis, and all endeavours should be made to conclude the same at an early date, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is clarified that if the case is fixed for trial and accused persons deliberately try to delay the disposal of the trial, then the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel their bail bonds in accordance with law. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28953 of 2010 (2) dt.08-08-2012 3/3 With the aforesaid observations and directions, the application stands finally disposed of. RPS/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 498A

Statute Text:
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Punishment for subjecting a married woman to Cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.