Allowed

Ajay Kumar Prajapat Alias Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand and Anr.

Jharkhand HC27 Feb 2018A.B.A./1155/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case upon the filing of a settlement agreement. The court modified the agreement to include divorce filing, alimony payments, and quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted on anticipatory bail subject to modified settlement terms including dissolution of marriage, alimony payment, and filing an application for quashing criminal proceedings.

Ajay Kumar Prajapat Alias Ajay Kumar Vs The State Of… — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1155 of 2017

¶2

Ajay Kumar Prajapati @ Ajay Kumar ….. Petitioner Versus

¶3

The State of Jharkhand 2. Sunita Kumari ….. Opp. Parties

¶4

---------

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH

¶6

--------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : M/s Asmita Srivastava, Advocate.

¶7

¶8

07/Dated: 27/02/2018

¶9

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jorapokhar P.S. Case No. 169 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 4520 of 2016, registered under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, lodged on the basis of one written report given by Sunita Kumari, opposite party no. 2 alleging that she was married with the petitioner according to Hindu rites and she went to her sasural, where she was tortured.

¶10

On 01.03.2017, notices were issued to opposite party no. 2. Pursuant thereto, on 28.07.2017, both the parties appeared physically and with the consent of the parties, the matter was referred to Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi and petitioner was directed to pay ad interim maintenance @ Rs. 4,000/- per month from July, 2017, which the petitioner is paying.

¶11

Perused the report of Smt. Mahua Palit and Sri P.C. Oraon, Mediators dated 23.02.2018, which reveals that the parties have settled their disputes and they have drawn the terms of the agreement duly signed by them.

¶12

Today, parties are physically present and have identified their signatures and ascertained the terms of the agreement.

¶13

Let the agreement arrived between the parties be a part of this anticipatory bail order with certain modifications agreed by the parties, which are as follows;(i) Both the parties have agreed to dissolve the marriage by filing petition under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶14

(ii) Petitioner has agreed to pay a permanent alimony of Rs. 11 lakhs to the opposite party no. 2 in installments, first

¶15

-2-

¶16

installment of Rs. 2 lacs was to be transferred through RTGS on or before 27.02.2018, which have already been transferred and opposite party no. 2 has accepted that she has received the amount of Rs. 2 lacs in her bank account no. 0594010111848 of United Bank of India. Further petitioner has also agreed to pay / transfer an amount of Rs. 3 lacs by RTGS / Demand Draft in the account of opposite party no. 2 latest by 2^nd Week of May, 2018.

¶17

(iii) According to the modified terms of the agreement, both parties are directed to appear before the Principal Judge, Family court, Dhanbad on 11.06.2018 and to file an application under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of their Marriage. (iv) Petitioner will again deposit a sum of Rs. 3 lacs on or before 11.06.2018 through RTGS and will produce the receipt of the amount or will produce Demand Draft of Rs. 3 lacs to be paid to the opposite party no. 2 on 11.06.2018 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad, who will ascertain the fact.

¶18

(v) Further the remaining amount of Rs. 3 lacs will be paid by the petitioner on the date to be fixed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad when the judgment of the suit filed under Section 13 (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act will passed by the court.

¶19

(vi) Further after filing of the application under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family court, Dhanbad, both parties will file an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. before this Court bringing all the developments for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Jorapokhar P.S. Case No. 169 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 4520 of 2016.

¶20

Be that as it may, I am inclined to admit the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The above named petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from the date of this order and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the Court below shall enlarge the above named petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/(Rupees fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like

¶21

-3-

¶22

amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Dhanbad, in connection with Jorapokhar P.S. Case No. 169 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 4520 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the modified conditions stated above in this order.

¶23

Let the original agreement arrived between the parties be sent to the court below to be kept in the record of the case and a xerox copy of the agreement be kept in the record of this case.

¶24

Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below and also to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad.

¶25

(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

¶26

Sunil/

Ajay Kumar Prajapat Alias Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Prajapat Alias Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarif Mondal And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Laxmi Kasi Alias Laxminath Kasi Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Shanti Pandey And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Munna Mahto And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Pradeep Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shailendra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand