IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40489 of 2009 SURESH MISHRA,son of Sukhdeo Mishra,resident of village-Brahmpur,P.S.-Phulparas,District- Madhubani, at present Mohalla-Keshari Nagar, Text Book Colony, P.S.-Rajiv Nagar, District- Patna. .. .. Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR .. Opp.Party ----------- For the Petitioner :M/s Krishna Pd. Singh(Senior Advocate), Kripanand Jha and Bimal Kumar,Advocates For the Complainant:M/s B.P.Pandey(Sr.Advocate), S.C.Giri & P.K.Sinha, Advocates For the State :Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, Addl.P.P. ---------- 06/ 04-05-2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for the offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, petitioner is the husband of the complainant and there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture against him. It is also alleged that petitioner has solemnized marriage with another lady, but that allegation is denied by the petitioner. In compliance of order dated 01-04-2010, the petitioner and the complainant are physically present in Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsels. In terms of the aforesaid order dated 01-04-2010, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant made sincere endeavour for arriving at a compromise between the petitioner and the complainant. Though 2 petitioner has shown his willingness to keep the complainant and a minor girl child with all dignity and honour, but the complainant has shown her unwillingness to live with him on the ground that he had solemnized marriage with another lady. In the aforesaid background, when the matter was heard yesterday, this Court requested the learned counsels appearing for the parties to have one more round of negotiation for one time settlement of the entire dispute between the parties by making payment of maintenance etc. to the complainant and her girl child by the petitioner. When this matter has been taken up today for its final disposal, learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite his persuasion his client has expressed inability to make payment of an amount exceeding rupees four lac. Learned counsel for the complainant states that originally his client was demanding rupees ten lac, but on his persuasion his client has agreed to reduce the aforesaid amount by claiming an amount of rupees five lac only and she is not prepared to take less than that amount. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the parties and in view of the fact that there is no possibility of restoration of the matrimonial relationship between the petitioner and the complainant, this Court is of the opinion that there should be one time settlement of the entire dispute between the parties and for that petitioner is directed to make payment of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees four lac and fifty thousand) to the complainant. Out of the 3 aforesaid amount of Rs.4,50,000/- towards one time settlement, the petitioner must pay an amount of rupees two lac to the complainant within a period of four weeks from today through Bank Draft. On payment of such amount to the complainant, in the event of arrest/surrender within the said period in connection with Complaint Case No.1963C/2008, the above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, subject to the conditions as laid down under sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Balance amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees two lac and fifty thousand) must be paid through Bank Draft within two months thereafter. On receipt of aforesaid amount of rupees two lac, the petitioner and the complainant shall file a petition under Section 13-B of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce by mutual consent. On payment of the entire amount of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees four lac and fifty thousand), the parties will file an appropriate petition in the court below for disposal of the present criminal case, and learned court below would dispose of the criminal case accordingly . Till expiry of four weeks from today or till furnishing of bail bonds, which ever is earlier, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner in the above noted case. It goes without saying that on failure to comply with 4 the directions recorded above, it will be construed that the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner has finally been rejected by this Court and thereafter the petitioner would be obliged to surrender in the court below, and seek regular bail, if so advised. AH/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)