IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24164 of 2010 SRI SUNIL KUMAR @ RINKU SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2. 02.08.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being the husband is apprehending his arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and ¾ of the D. P. Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already filed a restitution case in the year 2006 whereas this present complaint has been filed on 18.12.2008. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant was with the husband till 2008 but surprisingly the restitution case was filed in the year 2006. However, both sides are ready to resume conjugal life and they undertake to file an appropriate application before the learned court below. In that view of the matter, let the petitioner, namely, Sri Sunil Kumar @ Rinku Singh, be released on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender in the learned court below 2 within a period of twelve weeks from today in connection with complaint case no. 3442 ( C ) of 2008 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Patna, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. Within a period of two weeks, the petitioner will go to the complainant’s house and bring her back to her matrimonial home and both will appear on the next fixed date in the restitution case as well as the divorce case and will file appropriate applications in both cases that they have resumed the matrimonial relationship. If the petitioner will fail to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour then the complainant will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. U.K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)