IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2474 of 2011 PANTUSH CHAUDHARY @ PHANTUSH CHAUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 09.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner seeks his bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 651 of 2009 (Trial No. 1966 of 2010) for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is husband of the complainant and at the very outset, it is submitted on his behalf that he is ready to keep the complainant with full honour and dignity and, as a matter of fact, it is complainant, who does not want to lead her conjugal life with the petitioner. In the aforesaid circumstance, let the petitioner be released on bail provisionally for the period of three months on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with above stated Complaint Case No. 651 of 2009. It is made clear that after release of the petitioner from judicial custody, the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad shall issue a notice to the petitioner as well as complainant fixing a date for re-conciliation and shall take all possible steps to patch up the dispute of the parties and if he succeeds in his attempt, it goes without saying that he shall confirm the provisional bail, granted to the petitioner by this Court but if he fails in his attempt on account of any rigid approach of the petitioner then, in that event, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner by this Court, shall not be confirmed by him. It is also made clear that if the dispute of the parties is not materialized on account of non-cooperation of the complainant then, in that circumstance, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner, shall be confirmed by the learned court below itself. Shahzad (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J )