IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2299 of 2010 Jawed Ahsan Khan, S/o Ishteyaque Ahsan Khan, Resident of Village Kulouna, Police Station Bankey Bazar, District Gaya. --------- Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar ------ Opposite Party ----------- 4 02.07.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. In this case, the Kolkata Electric Supply Company (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the CESC’), the employer of the petitioner has filed the interlocutory application being I.A. No. 1092 of 2010 seeking certain clarifications in respect of the direction given to the CESC in the order dated 5.3.2010. Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned counsel for the CESC would submit that the petitioner has taken a loan from the Company to the tune of Rs. 67,896/- on 16.2.2009 which has to be recovered in 36 installments, each being of Rs. 1,886/-. The petitioner has only paid 13 installments and there is outstanding of Rs. 43,378/- towards principal and Rs. 6,739/- towards interest. He has further stated that the petitioner has taken also loan from the Company's Co-operative Credit Society namely the Electro Urban Co-operative Credit Society 2 Limited for a sum of Rs. 97,200/-, 30,000/- and 18,000/- and a sum of Rs. 78,300/-, 19,000/- and 15,000/- respectively are yet to be recovered from the petitioner. He would therefore submit that the direction given by this Court in the aforementioned order dated 5.3.2010 should not mean that the Company or its Co-operative Society would also stand restrained from the recovering the loan already given to the petitioner prior to the order dated 5.3.2010. In the opinion of this Court, such apprehension of Mr. Sanjay seems to be misconceived, inasmuch as, this Court had never meant that the petitioner would not be liable to refund the loan already taken by him prior to the order of this Court dated 5.3.2010. Actually the true purport of the earlier order of this Court dated 5.3.2010 was that the petitioner should not be allowed to take further loan so as to put his wife and children in a precarious situation for maintaining herself and her dependant three children. Therefore, while clarifying this aspect that the CESC and its Co-operative 3 Society would be free to recover the remaining amount as indicated above by way of monthly installments as agreed between the parties it would still restrain CESC to give any further loan to the petitioner on his own request unless the same is accompanied with also the request of his wife who now also stands as a nominee in all the accounts of deposit of the petitioner in the Company. Thus, henceforward, any liability towards loan by the petitioner in C.E.S.C. or in its any co-operative society or from any other source can be incurred by him only with the consent of the his wife. With the aforementioned clarification, observation and direction, the interlocutory application of C.E.S.C. being I.A. No. 1092 of 2010 is disposed of. Coming to the merits of this case, not only the counsel but the petitioner, husband also would convey to this Court that there has been restoration of conjugal right and that the children along with the complainant, wife are staying with the petitioner at Kolkata from 31st May, 2010. 4 The complainant, wife present in the Court would also submit that her experience in last one month was satisfactory and she at present has no grievance against her husband petitioner at least till date. The petitioner has also made a similar statement as with regard to his present marital status and relationship with his wife. This Court would also record the statement of the wife that at present she is being given Rs. 7,000/- per month only by the petitioner for maintaining the family of five persons including the petitioner and would complain that this amount is rather meager considering the present cost index. Taking into account that the salary and other emoluments of the petitioner is in the vicinity of rupees twenty-two thousand and odd and he, as noted above, has also liability of paying installments of loan apart from contributing to his statutory deduction, this Court would accept the offer of the petitioner to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month in place of Rs. 7,000/- per month to the wife, complainant for maintaining the 5 house and meeting the daily expenses. In such a situation, when the parties are no longer at loggerheads and infact are living together under one roof any further direction by this Court is not required. This Court has already granted provisional bail to the petitioner for a period of six months and therefore, if on completion of the period of six months, the petitioner and the complainant, wife would appear before the court below which has released the petitioner on provisional bail and would satisfy the said court with regard to their being peace and harmony in their conjugal life, the court below shall confirm the provisional bail of the petitioner. The court below, in fact if it would find that there are still some gap left between the parties, it may extend the provisional bail for another same period of six months before confirming the provisional bail. The petitioner at the time of seeking confirmation of provisional bail would also give a written undertaking to this effect to the trial court as with regard to 6 payment of Rs. 10000 per month to his wife and keeping his wife and children with dignity which would be part of the condition for his continuing on bail. It would be also open for both the parties to settle their all pending cases if they are satisfied that their conjugal life has now improved. Once such an application for withdrawal/compounding of the cases will be filed by the parties or their relatives, the concerned court shall pass the orders recording compromise of both the sides in the light of the order passed by this Court on 5.3.2010 read with this order. Before paring with, it is made clear that it would be open for any of the parties including now CESC to approach this Court for any further clarification/modification in this order or even for any further direction. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)