IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.45038 of 2010 Manoj Kumar Singh, son of late Siya Raghunandan Prasad Narayan Singh, resident of Village Chainpur, P.S. Chainpur (Siwan) --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar/ 2. Prabha Singh, daughter of Late Narottam Narayan Singh, at present residing at Village Bharhechaura, P.S. Bhatani, Dist. Deowaria. ----------- Opp. Parties --------------------- 6 21.12.2011 Heard Mr. Sumant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected on account of default by an order dated 26.3.2011 and when the application was restored and notices were issued to opposite party no.2, wife of the petitioner, who had filed First Information Report against the petitioner, her husband, for offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. This Court had in fact expected that the opposite party no.2 as per her own case would like to go back to the house of the petitioner, her husband but, then, even after service of notice, she has not appeared nor any Vakalatnama has been filed on her behalf. From reading of the First Information Report, it is clear that the 2 present First Information Report was lodged after the petitioner had filed a divorce case. From the order-sheet of Divorce Case No. 150 of 2007 pending in the Family Court, Siwan, it transpires that a divorce case was filed on 17.12.2007 whereas the First Information was lodged on 20.6.2010. It is, thus, clear that the present criminal case was only by way of vengeance of the opposite party no.2 against her husband. In any event, the petitioner was prepared to at least sort out the dispute but then the wife, opposite party no.2 herself has declined such offer as would be evident from her conduct of not appearing in pursuance of the notice of this Court in the present case. Considering all these aspects, this Court would confirm the earlier order dated 6.7.2011 granting provisional bail to the petitioner till disposal of this case. The Court below, therefore, will now confirm the provisional bail of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 6.7.2011. With the aforementioned 3 observations, this application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be communicated by FAX to the trial court if the cost for the same is deposited by the counsel for the petitioner. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)