Ajay Mahto vs State Of Bihar And Anr

The matter has been heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heard Mr. Bipin Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State and Mr. Arbind Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2645 of 2018 dated 20.09.2018, instituted under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

On 21.09.2020, the Court had directed for fresh service of notice on opposite party no. 2 through the local police station and it was further directed that she will ensure that she is represented before the Court.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties have reached at one time settlement and the terms of compromise have also been acted upon.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not controvert the position.

Learned APP submitted that the parties having arrived at one time settlement, the Court may grant indulgence.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, 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 Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No. 2645 of 2018, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.