IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29598 of 2010 MD.SHAHABUDDIN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 11.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Considering the nature of allegations under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the submission for revival of matrimonial harmony, this Court had granted anticipatory bail for six months with a direction that any application for regular bail shall be considered thereafter on its own merits, in light of subsequent developments and the attitude of the parties to be assessed by the court below. This order was with a specific purpose. The least that was expected was that the court below would have required the complainant to appear before him in response to the contention of the petitioner for revival of matrimonial harmony. Unfortunately, this has not been done, defeating the whole purpose of the order of this Court. This application is disposed off with appropriate directions to the court below to proceed in the manner as directed by this Court. The duty of the courts is to assist in restoring broken homes and not to break homes where 2 restoration be possible. It is expected that the court shall keep this aspect in mind, in view of its own failure to issue notice to the complainant. Let a copy of this order be communicated through Fax at the costs of the petitioner to the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger in connection with Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No. 10 of 2008, G.R. No. 144 of 2008, arising out of Complaint Case No. 1310C of 2007. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)