Patna High Court

Sanjeet Sada vs The State Of Bihar on 9 August, 2021

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 78936 of 2019
           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- Supaul
      ======================================================

Sanjeet Sada, aged about 24 years, Male Son of Kamal Sada, Resident of Village - Babhni Surat Patti Ward No.03, PS- Supaul, District- Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Puja Kumari, Daughter of Ram Japit Sada, Resident of Village -

Babhanipurpatti, Ward No.3, PO and District- Supaul.

3. The Civil Surgeon, Supaul.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

      For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Vijay Kumar Mukul, Advocate
      For the State           :        Mr. Anant Kumar No. 1, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Mukul, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar No. 1, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Supaul Mahila PS Case No. 27 of 2019 dated 08.06.2019,

instituted under Sections 341, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and

4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

4. The case has been heard on a number of occasions

and on the stand of learned counsel for the petitioner, the DNA Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78936 of 2019 dt.09-08-2021

test of the child was also conducted which showed him to be the

biological father. Thereafter, the petitioner had taken a stand that

he would marry the opposite party no. 2 as his misgivings about

the parentage of the child stood removed.

5. The Court had made sure that such stand was not

taken under any duress and it has been recorded that the stand was

that on his own volition, the petitioner and his family members

had agreed to get the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2

married and to accept the child in the house. Pursuant to the same,

an affidavit has been filed jointly by the parties in which it has

been stated that they have married about two and a half months

back and that the opposite party no. 2 and her child is living in the

matrimonial home with due love and affection.

6. On 12.07.2021, while adjourning the matter, for filing

of a joint affidavit by the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2,

the Court had also called for a report from the Superintendent of

Police, Supaul in the matter. Today, a report of the Superintendent

of Police, Supaul dated 31.07.2021 has been brought on record in

which statement of the parties as also the father of the opposite

party no. 2, has been brought on record which indicates that both

the parties are living together as husband and wife and there is no

complain.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78936 of 2019 dt.09-08-2021

7. The Court would pause here to note that at paragraph

no. 5 of the order dated 12.07.2021, there was a specific direction

that the Superintendent of Police, Supaul to find with regard to the

claim of the petitioner that he has married the opposite party no. 2.

From the entire report and the statement of the persons, there is no

indication that the parties have married and only it has been stated

that they are living together as husband and wife.

8. The Court is constrained to observe that neither the

Superintendent of Police, Supaul nor the learned APP have been

vigilant in ensuring compliance of the direction of the Court in its

order dated 12.07.2021, which shows sheer casualness on their

part and is unfortunate.

9. The Court would deal with the conduct of the

Superintendent of Police, Supaul, subsequently.

10. Coming on the merits of the matter, in view of there

being a specific statement made in paragraph no. 3 that the parties

have married some two and a half months back and the opposite

party no. 2 and her child are living in the matrimonial home with

the petitioner with full dignity and honour and the fact that learned

counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner along

with the opposite party no. 2 and his child had come to his

chamber and he has also talked to them and is satisfied that good Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78936 of 2019 dt.09-08-2021

relationship is prevailing between the parties, the Court is inclined

to allow the prayer.

11. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner

be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/-

(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each

to the satisfaction of the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge

cum-Special Judge, Supaul in Supaul Mahila PS Case No. 27 of

2019, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further, (i) that one of the

bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner and (ii) that the

petitioner give an undertaking before the Court that he shall keep

the opposite party no. 2 and her child in the matrimonial home

with full dignity, honour and security and shall take care of all

their needs and that the opposite party no. 2 shall be free to meet,

talk to and visit anyone she desires, without any led or hindrance

either by the petitioner or his family members. Any violation of

the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead

to cancellation of his bail bonds.

12. It shall also be open for the prosecution and the

opposite party no. 2/her guardians, to bring any violation of the

foregoing conditions by the petitioner, to the notice of the Court Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78936 of 2019 dt.09-08-2021

concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after

giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

13. The petition, for grant of pre-arrest bail stands

disposed of in the aforementioned terms.

14. However, in view of the short and simple direction

given by the Court to the Superintendent of Police, Supaul at

paragraph no. 5 in the order dated 12.07.2021, which reads as

under:

"5. Learned APP shall also obtain instructions from the Superintendent of Police, Supaul with regard to the claim of the petitioner that he has married the opposite party no. 2 and she and the child are living in the matrimonial home. The Superintendent of Police, Supaul shall also get verified that she is living in the matrimonial home peacefully, getting due acceptance from all the family members and without any fear."

not having been complied with, as there is not even a whisper as

to whether the parties have married, the Court considers it

appropriate that the Superintendent of Police, Supaul appears

before the Court to explain as to how such lapse has been

committed by him while submitting a report.

15. Thus, only for the purposes of appearance of the

Superintendent of Police, Supaul and consideration of his

explanation, the matter be listed on 23rd August, 2021, as the first

item at 10:30 AM. The Superintendent of Police, Supaul shall file Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78936 of 2019 dt.09-08-2021

his explanation and shall appear, through virtual mode if the

physical functioning of the Court does not resume, on the next

date.