IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46879 of 2008 GAUTAM KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 05/ 22.05.2009 Heard Sri Jagnnath Singh, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate for the informant and Sri Dasrath Mehta, APP for the State. The case is under Section 498A etc. of the IPC, which has been registered with the police on the basis of a typed report in which it was stated that after marriage the sister of the informant went to her marriage place and just thereafter the lady started being tortured by the petitioner as she was asked to bring a Maruti Car and Rs.5,00,000/- (five lakhs) as additional dowry. The lady was admitted to Mumbai and she was caused to miscarriage in the garb of giving her treatment by a doctor and the lady did not raise any voice against the did of the petitioner on account of being belonging to more cultured family. It is alleged that lady was ultimately turned out and she was brought to Purnea and her belongings were also kept back by the petitioner in his house and further that the petitioner threatened to get himself marry to another lady and threats - 2 - were regularly being given to the informant and the lady. Some of the admitted facts are that the lady was treated by Dr. Didwania at Patna and she diagnosed that she was suffering from Thyroid problem. The prescription of Dr. Didwania is Annexure-5 to the present petition and it appears from the perusal of the same that varieties of tests and investigations were suggested by the doctor which could be satisfied the doctor on many aspects of a health of a person right from being a patient of HIV up to being a patient of Thyroid or some sex relates problem. This is concluded that no suspected disease, like, HIV 1 or 2 was found, but the lady was found very high level of Thyroid problem. It appears from the annexure appearing at page 54, this could be well to be stated that the Thyroid problem is known to cause many problems and that could be sometimes caused miscarriage to a woman. It appears from other annexures that the relationship between the parties deteriorated so much so that the father of the petitioner filed Informatory Petitions against the lady alleging disruption etc. whereas the petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of his marriage from the lady before the appropriate Court. The - 3 - lady also alleged in her defence that the petitioner was a divorcee and this fact was concealed from her while getting marry to her and as such does not appear proving her marriage to the petitioner. The above the background under which the petition for anticipatory bail has to be judged and considering the facts and circumstances indicated above, I direct that Gautam Kumar Singh, the petitioner, in the event of his arrest by the police or surrender in the court below, be admitted to bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 65 of 2008, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. This order of anticipatory bail shall be valid only till the submission of the charge sheet, whereafter the question of allowing the petitioner to remain on bail shall be considered by the court below itself. DKS/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)