Allowed

Sushil Ranjan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Sept 2018A.B.A./2133/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached the High Court for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in a domestic violence case. Court admitted petition on conditions including continuous payment of interim maintenance, directing surrender within four weeks, and adhering to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. bail requirements.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail admitted on conditions of monthly maintenance payment, surrender within four weeks, and compliance with Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Sushil Ranjan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 2133 of 2018

¶2

Sushil Ranjan …… Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Namita Sinha …… Opposite Parties ---------

¶3

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State :A.P.P. For the Informant: Mr. Deepak Kr. Dubey, Advocate

¶5

---------

¶6

05/Dated: 11/09/2018

¶7

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No. 325 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 1332 of 2017 for the offence under sections 498A, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and udner section 4 of the D.P. Act.

¶8

It appears that under order dated 26.07.2018, the petitioner was directed to pay interim maintenance @ Rs. 4,000/- per month to the informant from the month of June, 2018.

¶9

Today, when the case is called out, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has complied the aforesaid order and paid the maintenance amount to the O.P. No.2 till the month of August, 2018 and this fact was admitted by the counsel for the O.P. No. 2.

¶10

Counsel for the O.P. No. 2 opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

In these circumstances, I am inclined to admit the petitioners anticipatory bail on the following conditions;

¶12

(a) In terms of order dated 26.07.2018 the petitioner will continue to pay Rs. 4,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the O.P. No. 2 till the disposal of the case.

¶13

(b) The petitioner is directed to deposit the arrear amount of Rs. 4,000/- for the month of September, 2018 latest by 27.09.2018.

¶14

(c)Thereafter the O.P. No. 2 is directed to appear before the trial court and file application through learned counsel, thereafter the aforesaid amount would be released in favour of O.P. No. 2 after making proper verification.

¶15

(d)The O.P. No. 2 is directed to furnish her bank account number before trial court, thereafter, it will the duty of the trial court that from the month of

¶16

October, 2018, the aforesaid amount would be directly deposited by the petitioner in the bank account of O.P. No. 2.

¶17

(e) The petitioner is directed to deposit the said amount on or before 25th

¶18

day of every month.

¶19

(f) If the petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount for two consecutive months, the informant is at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner before this Court through learned counsel.

¶20

(g) Deposition of amount as interim maintenance would be subject to result of any order passed by the competent court of jurisdiction.

¶21

(h) It is expected that both the parties shall co-operate in the case for its expeditious disposal.

¶22

In view of above, the 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the court of Shri Prem Shankar, learned J.M, Ist Clas, Ramgarh, in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No. 325 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 1332 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

Satyarthi/-

¶24

(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

Sushil Ranjan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Ranjan v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Rajesh Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Jha Alias Rajesh Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jail Prakash Paswan Alias Kali Paswan Alias Jai Prakash Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Radha Kumari Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Diwakar Mandal Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Amit Asthana Alias Amit Kumar Asthana Vs The State Of Jharkhand