IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.43876 of 2010 Dipak Sah, S/o Late Kashi Nath Sah, R/O/V- Ghurna Bazar, P.S.- Ghurna Bazar, District- Araria…. …..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, 2. Sadhana Devi, W/o- Dipak Sah, D/o Ramchandra Prasad, r/o Birpur, Ward No. 8, P.S. Birpur, Distt- Supaul….. …..Opposite parties …………. For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun, Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Vivek Kumar, Advocate ………………….. 15 21.09.2011 Heard the parties. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 498 A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. This matter was heard on several occasions. On 14.12.2010, when the matter was being heard on the first occasion, upon the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that he is ready to keep his wife extending full dignity and honour to her, notice was issued to the opposite party no.2 and provisional bail was granted to the petitioner till 19th of January, 2011, which was extended time to time. The petitioner-husband and 2 opposite party no.2-wife had appeared in person before this Court. However, the process of rapprochement did not prove fruitful. Today, a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, whereby he has undertaken to transfer half of his share of land in the name of his two children from his first wife within a period of one year, as stated in his earlier supplementary affidavit. It has also been stated that he owned 18 decimals of ancestral property situated in Mauza Ghurna vide Khata No. 24, Kheshra Nos. 848 and 849 etc. It has also been stated on behalf of the petitioner that a house is also standing over the aforesaid land. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is not immediately transferring his aforesaid land for the reason that he wants to do that after making it free from encumbrances, which would be possible within one year. Petitioner has also stated that he is ready to pay Rs. 1100/- per month by way of maintenance to the opposite party no.2. Learned counsel has also submitted that petitioner has already spent about four months in 3 custody. In above view of the matter, the provisional bail earlier granted vide order dated 14.12. 2010, which has been extended time to time, is hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner would deposit Rs. 1100/- per month for the opposite party no.2- wife before the court below in the first week of every month commencing from November, 2011. For the month of October, the petitioner would be required to deposit the amount by 14th of October, 2011. The opposite party no.2-wife would be entitled to withdraw the aforesaid amount irrelevant of the fate of the concerned case. Further, the petitioner would also file sufficient document after one year before the court concerned to show that he has transferred the concerned land along with the part of house standing over there in favour of his children from his first wife within the aforesaid period of one year as per undertaking. In case, the conditions are violated by the petitioner, the court below would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. However, in case the 4 issue of maintenance comes for adjudication before any court of competent jurisdiction, then this order would operate till a decision is taken by a such court in this regard. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. Sanjay-II (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)