IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4795 of 2010 GAUTAM KUMAR @ GAUTAM KUMAR GUPTA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER For the Petitioner: Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Informant: M/s Rajeev Ranjan Sinha and Sushil Kumar, Advocates For the State: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate ----------- 7 05.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the informant and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case punishable under section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the informant filed affidavits. Let the same be kept on the record. The stand of the petitioner was that he is ready to lead a conjugal life with his wife with full dignity and honour and learned counsel for the informant has also stated that the wife is also ready to go with the husband. However, they were subsequently required to file affidavits. The petitioner has filed affidavit showing his willingness to leave with the wife. The wife has also filed an affidavit to that extent, but it has been stated in the affidavit that there is a danger to her life from her husband and in-laws. Thus, it has jointly been submitted that since there is lack of confidence between the parties, it will not be proper to force them to live together. The petitioner has filed affidavit that he is ready to pay Rs. 2 750/- per month by way of maintenance to his wife. Learned counsel submitted that the same may be subject to and till any order is passed by any court having competent jurisdiction in this behalf or in any suit filed in future by either of the parties for annulment of marriage. Learned counsel for the informant also does not object to that. In the above view of the matter, the provisional bail earlier granted by this Court vide order dated 04.05.2010 is hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs. 750/- per month within two weeks of every month commencing from September 2010. So far the maintenance for the month of August 2010 is concerned, he shall deposit the same till 31st of August, 2010. The aforesaid sum would be deposited by the petitioner before the court concerned where the case is pending. The informant would be at liberty to withdraw the said amount. It is made clear that this order would be subject to any order, if passed in any proceeding in future brought for the purpose of maintenance or any order passed in future in this regard by a court of competent jurisdiction. SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)