IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19995 of 2009 RANJEET KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 3.8.2009 Heard. The petitioner who is husband is an accused in a case under section 498(A) and 494 of the I.P.C. It is alleged that uterus of the complainant was removed at Ahmedabad without her consent. Learned counsel submits that it would appear from Annexure-2 that consent of the patient was taken in respect of her hysterectomy. Learned counsel further submits that as the petitioner is Marketing Executive , in fact, the girl does not want to live with him. Learned counsel for the complainant states that on pretext of her minor operation the entire uterus was removed. It has further been alleged that time to time, money has been demanded and she has been assaulted. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is rejected. However, he may renew his prayer for bail after five months. Anilkrsinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)