Dismissed

Aslam Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC25 Sept 2018B.A./2358/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 304(B)/34 IPC concerning a dowry death, the High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's plea. Noting evidence of consistent dowry demands and the progress of the trial, the court deemed bail inappropriate and directed the trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail rejected; trial directed to conclude at the earliest.

Aslam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 2358 of 2018

¶3

----

¶4

Aslam Ansari … Petitioner -versusThe State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶6

----

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shekhar Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh, Advocate ----

¶8

6/ 25.09.2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State produces Viscera Report. The same be kept on record.

¶10

Petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Katkamsandi Police Station Case No.206 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.2821 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Hazaribagh.

¶11

Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Deceased was married to this petitioner on 25.03.2015. She died on 28.09.2017.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no mark of injury on the body of the deceased nor any pesticide or poison was detected in the viscera. He lastly submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2017.

¶13

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there was consistent demand of dowry. Death is within 7 (seven) years of marriage. Two days prior to the date of occurrence, sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) and Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) were given to the petitioner. He also submits that the trial is in progress and three witnesses have been examined.

¶14

Taking into the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. assisted by the learned counsel for the informant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner,

¶15

-: 2 :-

¶16

abovenamed, in connection with Katkamsandi Police Station Case No.206 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.2821 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Hazaribagh, is hereby rejected.

¶17

Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest.

¶18

This application stands dismissed.

¶19

( Ananda Sen, J.)

¶20

Kumar/Cp-03

Aslam Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aslam Ansari 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pratayesh Dutta Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Dhaneshwar Turi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Paulina Guria Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naresh Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Yogendra Prasad Karan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ranjit Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand