IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.53091 of 2008 DIPAK KUMAR @ DIPAK KUMAR SAH, son of Mahendra Sah, resident of Mohalla-Hariganj Chowk, P.S. & District-Kaimur. Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 3. 4.2.2009 Heard Sri Anshuman Jaipuriyar, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri Bhola Prasad, Advocate for the Informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner had approached this court earlier in Miscellaneous Petition No.18081 of 2007 and had obtained some interim relief by way of putting an embargo on arrest of the petitioner under condition that he will take back the lady. The court would have felt benefited had the learned Sessions Judge I/C, Katihar while considering and disposing of the prayer for bail of the petitioner on 8.12.2008 in B.P.No.1056 of 2008 could have pointed out the circumstances under which the condition imposed by the petitioner could not materialize or could not work. That could have been done by calling the wife to the court and getting produced the petitioner from custody and then after talking to both of them. Unfortunately, some practical human approach was required to - 2 - be adopted by the courts below but that does not appear adopted. I could as such, direct the rehearing of B.P.No.1056 of 2008 by Dr. Sri Ratan Kishore Tiwary, Sessions Judge I/C, Katihar who was hearing the above noted petition and disposed it of on 8.12.2008 so that he approaches the problem which is exclusively domestic and human, between the two spouses and tries to resolve it by utilizing his good offices. I direct the restoration of Bail Petition No.1056 of 2008 to its original number and file by District Judge, Katihar and transferring the same to the Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Sri Ratan Kishore Tiwary for hearing in the light of the direction contained herein. The petitioner shall be produced as and when the court required him to be produced before it. Likewise, the lady shall also attend the proceedings. May be that the court shall have to give notice to the lady through the officer-in- charge of the police station in whose jurisdiction she lives for attending the proceeding. The S.D.J.M., Katihar who could be seized with Complaint Case No.1667 of 2003 may also draw an order and bring the facts into the - 3 - notice of the counsel of the lady that she is required to attend the proceeding before the Additional Sessions Judge, Katihar on a particular date. The petition is disposed of with the above direction. It may be pointed out to the court below that rejecting the prayer for bail under facts of the present nature could always prove to be counter productive and the court has to step out of the shoes of the Presiding Officer and act as a conciliator and counselor both and lead the parties to an amicable solution to the problem. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through fax at the cost of the petitioner. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )