IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6748 of 2011 Radhe Shyam Mahto @ Nankhi Mahto Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr. ----------- 3 10.08.2011 The petitioner and opposite party no.2 are present. The petitioner admits the marriage with the complainant but it is stated that the marriage was never consummated since he was minor, he was forced to marry the complainant, however this contention of the petitioner is being denied by opposite party no.2. The disputed factum of the marriage cannot be decided in the present proceeding. The petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 1,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2 from September, 2011 by depositing the same in the bank account of the opposite party no.2 by second week of every month. The opposite party no.2 accepts the offer of the petitioner and agrees to supply the bank account number to the petitioner within a period of two weeks by submitting the same on affidavit before the learned court below. The aforesaid payment will be subject to any 2 order being passed in matrimonial or maintenance proceeding. The aforesaid payment will have no bearing on the relationship between the parties. Considering the stand of the parties, let the above named petitioner, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 944 of 2008, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Three consecutive defaults in making payment by the petitioner will give liberty to the opposite party no.2 to file an appropriate application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)