IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7075 of 2009 UPEN RAI @ UPEN KUMAR RAI, SON OF SHRI JAI PRAKASH RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MANPUR, P.O. AND P.S. SONEPUR, DISTRICT SARAN. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SUMAN DEVI, WIFE OF UPEN RAI AND DAUGHTER OF RUDAL RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAHARICHAK, P.O. AND P.S. SONEPUR, DISTRICT SARAN. ---- OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 2 11.1.2010 The petitioner has moved this Court against the order dated 24.11.2008, passed in Complaint Case No. 994 of 2006 by Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, by which the Court has cancelled the bail on the ground that the petitioner has not fulfilled the conditions under Section 438(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which were the grounds for granting him bail by this Court. This Court by order dated 15.2.2007 has stated that “the Court below of the jurisdiction, i.e., the Family Court, shall also see that all efforts relating to conciliation and mediation are taken care of for such conciliation and mediation so that the parties may live happily after the compromise. Any breach of condition in respect of section 498A I.P.C. case shall result in cancellation of his bail bonds without further reference to this bench, as the complainant has stated that she is ready to live with her husband.” After the order of the Court, the petitioner and his wife left together from the Court premises on different dates which would appear from annexure-4 series. However, it appears that matters were not settled between them and finally the opposite party left her husband’s house and she has made certain allegations against him. A divorce suit has also been filed by the petitioner 2 against his wife in which one witness has been examined. It is apparent that in the divorce suit no conciliation has taken place and as such plea of the petitioner that he is willing to live with his wife appears to be contradictory. In view of the aforesaid fact, I find that there is no anomaly in the order dated 24.11.2008. This application is dismissed. The petitioner should surrender and the Court below will consider his regular bail application within a period of one week without being prejudice by the fact that his anticipatory bail application has been cancelled. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)