IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24715 of 2008 PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA Versus STATE OF BIHAR - - - - 4. 15.7.2008 Heard. This is other attempt by the petitioner husband of the complainant of Complaint Case No. 2476 of 2005 pending before the Sub- divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, earlier attempt having failed in Cr. Misc. No. 42741 of 2007. The earlier order contained in Annexure 1 may not be in many words but the reasons could be the same which were available to this Court on the earlier occasion and which is prevailing in the present attempt that if a husband makes an allegation of adultery against his wife and does not implead the man in spite of naming him in the petition as opposite party then he could be more cruel, what the petitioner appears to the Court, to his wife. On the same score I dismiss the petition. Shri Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner was making a fervent appeal to me to leave some room for the liberty of the petitioner 2 in case of conciliation between the parties. I believe that the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, is quite a sensitive Officer and understands the necessity of allowing quite some play in the marital joint of the parties so as not to pushing it to the roads of destruction, rather, retaining it at a platform of retrieval and salvage. I believe, if the petitioner files a petition in the court below, i.e., the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, in the above noted complaint case, due cognizance is taken of the intentions of the petitioner by issuing notice to the complainant by fixing a date and on the appearance of the parties before him, the learned Magistrate shall devote sufficient time in his chambers to the cause of justice and above all the cause of retrieving the wrecked marriage. The court below may presume that it may not be successful on a date or a couple of dates. The learned Magistrate may require to sit with the couple on many occasions but that could not be taken as a wastage of time 3 or a futile exercise because justice does not have one form of sitting and writing judgment and orders but the same could be imparted more substantially if a Judge devotes time in reconstructing marriage of the present class. I believe, the learned Magistrate shall not remand the petitioner to custody till he has any word in the world to assume that the petitioner does not allow the reconciliation. In case the wife appears taking very difficult posture or putting up unacceptable and unreasonable reasons for joining the petitioner then the court below could admit the petitioner to bail without any prejudice. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)