Allowed

Sandeep Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC8 Jan 2019A.B.A./2439/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached the High Court of Jharkhand under Article 226 seeking anticipatory bail in a matrimonial dispute involving sections 498A, 323, 341, 354, and 34 of the IPC. The court noted a joint submission regarding compromise via mediation. Anticipatory bail was granted, directing release upon arrest within four weeks subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Seen as a fit case, the petitioner shall be granted privilege of anticipatory bail. Upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with t

Sandeep Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Domestic Violence | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2439 of 2018

¶2

Sandeep Singh … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Seema Singh … Opposite Parties ------

¶3

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶4

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amitabh Prasad, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. A.K. Yadav, Advocate

¶5

------

¶6

Order No.09 Dated- 08.01.2019

¶7

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 32 of 2017 (G.R. Case No.2469 of 2017) registered under sections 498A/323/341/354 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. P.P. for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 jointly submits that consequent upon mediation between the parties, the matter has been compromised between the parties as has been reported by letter of the mediators dated 21.12.2018. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

The learned Addl. P.P. assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that in view of the compromise between the parties, they have no objection for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

Considering the submission of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five Thousand) with two sureties of the

¶12

like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 32 of 2017 (G.R. Case No.2469 of 2017) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶14

Sonu/Gunjan-

Sandeep Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Singh 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

Mahboob Alam Alias Md Mahboob Ali Alias Mahboob Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Md Mokhtar Ahmad Alias Mokhtar Ahmad Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Shanti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhiraj Kumar Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jimmi Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anita Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand