Allowed

Santosh Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 May 2019A.B.A./1547/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a 498A IPC case. Conditions included depositing Rs. 1,00,000 as interim victim compensation and furnishing a bail bond. The court directed the criminal court to adjust this payment towards any future maintenance claims. The order was dated 13.05.2019.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within eight weeks, subject to depositing Rs. 1,00,000 as interim victim compensation and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.

Santosh Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 1547 of 2019

¶3

Santosh Verma … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sarita Devi … Opposite Parties ------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vineet Prakash, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. K.K. Mishra, Advocate

¶6

------

¶7

Order No.05 Dated- 13.05.2019

¶8

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No.285 of 2016 (G.R. No. 1773 of 2016) registered under sections 323/341/498A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

Heard the parties.

¶10

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are false and are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the informant-opposite party no.2 without prejudice to his defence in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned Addl. P.P. assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs.1,00,000/- as ad interim victim compensation in favour of informant-opposite party no.2 – Sarita Devi and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty

¶13

Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No.285 of 2016 (G.R. No. 1773 of 2016) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶14

In case, the petitioner deposits the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant-opposite party no.2 – Sarita Devi and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.

¶15

In case, the said amount is received by the informantopposite party no.2, the same shall be adjusted with respect to the maintenance in any present or future proceeding between the parties or final settlement between the parties, if and when the same takes place.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Sonu/Gunjan-

Santosh Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Verma 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

Sharda Devi Alias Giri Sharda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bagun Sinku Vs the State of Jharkhand

Charu Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Om Prakash Chandrabanshi Alias Om Prakash Chandravanshi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sushil Kumar Suman Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand