IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34812 of 2009 RAJESH BIND @ BAM BIND son of Ramji Bind, resident of village- Korma, P. S.- Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad. .. petitioner Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Sonmanti Devi wife of Rajesh Bind @ Bam Bind, resident of village- Korma, P. S. Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad, at present vill- Kalia Bigha, P. S. Telhara, District Nalanda…..Opposite parties ----------- 2. 09.10.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the informant as also the State. Counsel for the husband petitioner would submit that the allegations brought against the petitioner under section 498 A IPC is frivolous inasmuch as it is the wife, opposite party no. 2 who is not prepared to live with the petitioner. Such statement however has been immediately controverted by the counsel for opposite party no. 2 and opposite party no. 2, the wife, herself who is present in the court. She says that she has/had always been willing to live with the petitioner and in fact in past also when she had, under the orders of the court, sought to compromise the matter and had started living with the petitioner, she was badly assaulted as also subjected to mental cruelty and torture in various forms and therefore her apprehension is that after the present episode she will 2 be subjected to similar treatment. Counsel for the petitioner would however submit that if the petitioner is now given a chance, he would not only behave as an ideal husband but also would take full care of his wife, opposite party no. 2. Considering the aforementioned aspects and specially the fact that the dispute arises out a matrimonial matter, this court would dispose of this application with the following directions:- (a) the petitioner namely Rajesh Bind @ Bam Bind shall be released on provisional bail for a period of three months on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S. D. Roy, J.M. Ist Class, Hilsa (Nalanda) in connection with Complaint Case No. 773(c)/2007 and one of the bailors would be a close family member. (b) on being released from jail the petitioner will immediately go to opposite party no. 2 where she is at present residing and will take her to his house and start living in a usual manner and of course without indulging in any physical or 3 mental torture to his wife, the opposite party no. 2. (c) Both petitioner and opposite party no. 2 on expiry of the period of three months shall appear before the concerned court from where the petitioner would be released on provisional bail and the court below after ascertaining from both husband and wife that they had lived in harmony in a peaceful manner, would extend the provisional bail for a further period of three months. This process shall continue for a period of three years and if at any point of time learned magistrate is satisfied that the petitioner has again started misbehaving and harassing opposite party no. 2 physically and/or mentally, he would cancel the provisional bail of the petitioner and take him into custody. (d) On successful completion of the period of three years of leading a peaceful life of both the husband, petitioner and the wife, opposite party no. 2 to the satisfaction of court below, the provisional bail of the petitioner shall be confirmed. (e) all the pending cases against the 4 petitioner filed by opposite party no. 2 or vice versa shall be governed by the present order and therefore in all such cases both petitioner and opposite party no. 2 would appear before the concerned court and produce this order and the behaviour of the petitioner shall also watched in those cases in a similar manner for a period of three years whereafter those cases as also the present may be finally withdrawn/ closed. In any event, if the provisional bail of the petitioner would be cancelled by the court below, the petitioner will be at liberty to move this Court. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)