This order confirms provisional bail granted to the petitioner accused of offences under 498-A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court imposes conditions requiring monthly court appearance and a monthly deposit of Rs. 3000 to the wife.
Bail granted subject to appearance once a month and deposit of Rs. 3000 monthly with the wife.
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
B.A. No. 5346 of 2017
Binod Barik ….. Petitioner -V e r s u s-
1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Geeta Barik @ Hemwati ….. Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN For the Petitioner : Ms. Gouri Debi, Advocate For the State : A.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shashi Kant Thakur, Advocate 9/7.02.2018 Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
In compliance of the order dated 15.01.2018 the opposite party no.2 is filing an affidavit in Court. The same is accepted and be kept on record.
The petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 354, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3/4 of the Witch Craft Act.
The petitioner is the husband. The allegation against the petitioner is that he tortured his wife and driven her out of the house and has also demanded dowry. It has also alleged that the petitioner is denying the paternity of the child.
Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction from his client, submits that by no stretch of imagination the petitioner deny the paternity of child and admits that he is the father of the child. She further submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false and frivolous and the petitioner remained in custody from 06.5.2017, till he was granted provisional bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2017.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.2 opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has driven out the informant from the house and is not taking any steps for maintaining her.
After taking into consideration the above facts, I feel that it will not be proper to keep the petitioner in custody. I therefore allow this application. The provisional bail granted on 21.07.2017 in connection with Mahila, P.S.Case No. 04 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 93 of 2017 is hereby confirmed, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall appear once a month before the Court where the case is pending and he will hand-over a sum of Rs. 3000/- per month to the O.P. No.2 (wife), failing which the bail granted to him stands cancelled.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Amar/cp3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to confirm the bail granted to the accused petitioner in a matrimonial offence case involving allegations of 498-A and cruelty.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Binod Barik
State of Jharkhand
Geeta Barik @ Hemwati
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
