Allowed

Raju Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Apr 2019A.B.A./379/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this A.B.A. petition, the High Court at Ranchi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case where parties agreed to resume conjugal life. The court directed the petitioner to take the respondent wife home and maintain her dignity.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing a bond, keeping the wife at his house with dignity, and not having any relationship with Kanchan Kumari.

Raju Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B. A. No. 379 of 2019

¶3

Raju Mahto … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. … Opposite Parties

¶4

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Yunus, Adv. For the State : Addl. P.P. For Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. S. K. Singh, Adv.

¶6

05 / 02.04.19 Heard the parties. Both the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 are present in the court today.

¶7

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with complaint case no. 836 of 2017 registered under Sections 323/341/498A/120B of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ D. P.Act.

¶8

It is agreed to between the parties that the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 will resume their conjugal life from today onwards.

¶9

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not solemnized any other marriage and he undertakes that he will keep and maintain the opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honor as his lawful wife and he will not have any relationship with another lady namely Kanchan Kumari nor will allow Kanchan Kumari to enter in his house, hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

The learned Addl. PP and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail on satisfying the court

¶12

concerned that the petitioner has taken the opposite party no. 2 to his house and he is keeping and maintaining the opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honor as his lawful wife and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M, Hazaribagh in connection with complaint case no. 836 of 2017 subject to the condition that the petitioner will keep and maintain the opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honor as his lawful wife and he will not have any relationship with another lady namely Kanchan Kumari nor will allow Kanchan Kumari to enter in his house along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶14

Smita/-

Raju Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Mahto 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

Sumit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Raj Vs the State of Jharkhand

Devendra Prasad Bauri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sahbaj Alam Alias Shabaj Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sudhanshu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand