Dismissed

MD Gulam Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Dec 2019A.B.A./3149/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an anticipatory bail application under C.P. Case No. 326 of 2017 involving offences under sections 498A and 323 IPC. The petitioner was previously denied anticipatory bail. Despite mediation suggesting a settlement, final terms were not agreed upon. The High Court rejected the fresh application as no new grounds were added following the earlier rejection.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.

MD Gulam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 3149 of 2019

¶3

Md. Gulam Ansari …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Salma Khatoon …… Opposite Parties

¶6

--------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. M.B. Lal , Advocate For the State :A.P.P For the O.P. No. 2: Mrs. Shweta Singh (Amicus Curiae)

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH

¶8

C.A.V on : 10/12/2019 Pronounced on: 11/12/2019

¶9

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with C.P. Case No. 326 of 2017 for the offence under sections 498A, 323 of the Indian Penal.

¶10

It appears that earlier the petitioner filed A.B.A. No. 4702 of 2018 and petitioner was asked to pay Rs. 4,000/- per month to O.P. No. 2 as ad interim maintenance, but he refused to pay the same, accordingly, under order dated 02.11.2018, A.B.A. No. 4702 of 2018 was rejected and the trial court was directed to formulate scheme for rehabilitation, which was later on formulated.

¶11

Further, under order dated 26.08.2019, with the consent of the parties, with a view to give one more chance, the matter was referred to the Secretary-cum-Coordinator, DLSA, Bokaro for mediation. Mediation report dated 14.10.2019 submitted by Mediator, Bokaro revealed that mediation is successful and both the parties are agreed to compromise at the point of dispute. Hence mediation in this case has been settled.

¶12

But on 21.11.2019, when both the parties were present before this court for ascertain the terms and conditions of the mediation, petitioner has

¶13

¶14

stated that he is ready to take responsibility of his wife-O.P. No. 2. But the O.P. No. 2 stated that petitioner is not ready to stay with her. Under these circumstances, the mediation between the parties failed and the matter was directed to be heard on merit on 10.12.2019.

¶15

Accordingly, the matter is being heard on merit.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is ready to pay interim maintenance to the O.P. No. 2.

¶17

Learned A.P.P as well as learned counsel for the O.P. NO. 2 opposed the prayer for bail.

¶18

Taking all these facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that earlier the A.B.A. No. 4702 of 2018 filed by the petitioner, has been rejected vide order dated 02.11.2018 and no fresh ground has been made in the instant bail application, accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.

¶19

Let a copy of this order be communicated the concerned trial court and a copy of this order be sent to the Member Secretary, JHALSA for quantifying the fee of the Amicus Curiae.

¶20

(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

¶21

Satyarthi/-

MD Gulam Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Gulam 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

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dr Mushtaque Ahmad Ansari Vs Health

Prawesh Kumar Mahto Vs Police

Dilip Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ramesh Kumar Choudhary Vs Water Resources Departement

MD Shamshad Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand