IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2473 of 2010 RAM BAHADUR SINGH YADAV @ RAM BAHADUR SINGH @ RAM BAHADUR @ Bahadur Singh, S/o Late Ram Bachan Singh, resident of Bhitri Bandh, P.S. Karamchat (Sawar),District Kaimur (Bhabua) presently residing at village- Barban, P.S. Adhoura, District – Kaimur (Bhabua)…. Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 26.02.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner facing prosecution for offence under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal code has his defence for the purposes of anticipatory bail that he is an 35 years old man and the story of the complainant that she was married with the petitioner some time 20 years earlier would not inspire confidence. Counsel for the petitioner also referred to certain documents to show that the petitioner is happily married to another lady and according to him, the complainant herself is an imposter. This Court, however, would not give any finding on the aforesaid submissions as that may vitally prejudice the trial of the petitioner. This much however becomes clear from the allegation made in the complaint petition itself that the complainant was part 2 and parcel of the life of the petitioner and there is also a daughter from the said relationship of the petitioner with the complainant. In fact, it appears that after the daughter of the complainant born out of the relationship of the petitioner got married, he has left taking care of her and as such the complainant became destitute and helpless lady and had to take recourse of filing of the complaint petition. In an Indian Society normally no respective lady having a married daughter infact is expected to claim a stranger to be her husband. Moreover there is also specific allegation of overtact against the petitioner in the complaint petition of committing torture and cruelty by him against the complainant. Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in course of making submissions on instruction has submitted that the petitioner is also not ready to atone himself and he would neither keep the complainant with him nor would financially support her. Such attitude of the petitioner therefore would only reflect that 3 he has been purposely neglecting the complainant who claims to be the legally wedded wife of the petitioner. The issue as to whether the marriage of the petitioner with the complainant was the first and thus legally valid marriage or that the petitioner had subsequently entered into a clandestine relationship with Ganga Devi, the alleged second wife is a matter of evidence to be adduced in trial but then this cannot be said that the complaint case filed by the opposite party no. 2 is altogether false and baseless. That being so, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, such prayer is rejected. However, in the event, the petitioner would surrender and seek regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merits without being influenced or prejudiced by anything said in this order. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)