Allowed

Parwez Alam v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC26 Aug 2019A.B.A./2990/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for anticipatory bail, this Court granted relief on the condition that the petitioners surrender within eight weeks, satisfy the lower court regarding maintenance of the wife, and furnish a bail bond with sureties which treat the case as summarised.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted provided the petitioners surrender within eight weeks, satisfy the lower court about the wife's maintenance, and furnish a bail bond of Rs 25,000 each with two sureties.

Parwez Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2990 of 2019

¶2

Perwez Alam 2. Shafina Khatoon … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Gulsan Aara … Opposite Parties

¶3

------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajan Sahay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anand Kr. Pandey, Addl. P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate

¶6

------

¶7

Order No.05 Dated- 26.08.2019

¶8

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Khelari P.S. Case No.63 of 2018 (G.R. No.4085 of 2018) registered under sections 498A/341/323/313/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of D.P. Act.

¶9

Heard the parties.

¶10

Both the petitioner no.1 and opposite party no.2 are present in the Court today.

¶11

It is submitted jointly by both the petitioner no.1 and opposite party no.2 that they are ready and willing to resume their conjugal life. It is agreed to between both the parties that the opposite party no.2 will go to the house of the petitioner no.1 from the Court today itself and the petitioner no.1 undertakes that he will keep and maintain the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife.

¶12

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and are general and omnibus in nature and since a settlement has been arrived at between the parties, hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

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

¶14

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 petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on petitioner no.1 satisfying the learned court below that the petitioner no.1 has taken the opposite party no.2 to his house and is keeping and maintaining her with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife and on both the petitioners on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Ranchi, in connection with Khelari P.S. Case No.63 of 2018 (G.R. No.4085 of 2018) with the condition that the petitioner no.1 will keep and maintain the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶15

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶16

Gunjan-

Parwez Alam v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parwez Alam 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Avinash Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Banti Lohar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunil Dhobi Alias Sunil Rajak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sarita Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand