Single judge rejected anticipatory bail application of petitioner accused in dowry-related offence involving forged documents, holding case not fit for trial court bail relaxation.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioner directed to surrender within three weeks for regular bail consideration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3845 of 2014
Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Das …… Petitioner Versus
The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
--------For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------
Order No.07 Dated: 20th April, 2015
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.711 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. Case No.3236 of 2014, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the petitioner has arranged his marriage with the informant in a temple and started living as husband and wife. He assured that the marriage will be registered before the Marriage Registrar and obtained signature of informant on some papers. Now the petitioner has procured fake certificate showing that informant is wife of one Rajeev Kumar. As a matter of fact, she does not know any person known as Rajeev Kumar. It is further alleged that a sum of Rs.10 lacs has been demanded and threatening in various ways and on various occasions have been hurled.
It is submitted that informant is already married with one Rajeev Kumar and she concealed this fact and lodged a case u/s 498-A I.P.C. Now she has come up with other allegations and lodged this case.
Learned counsel appearing for the informant has submitted that forged marriage certificate has been procured by the petitioner in order to escape from responsibilities.
Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. Considering all these aspects, I do not find it to be a fit case in which benefit of Section 438 Cr.P.C. is to be given. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of above named petitioner stands rejected.
However, petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of three weeks from today for seeking regular bail and if does so, the prayer for regular bail may be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced with this order.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.)
NKC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the present circumstances.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Das
The State of Jharkhand
D.N. Upadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
