Allowed

Etwari Turiya v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Sept 2019A.B.A./5775/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three petitioners approached the High Court of Jharkhand seeking anticipatory bail in a domestic violence and criminal complaint alleging cruelty. The appellant approved the request, ordering release on bail upon surrender within four weeks subject to conditions not to harass the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within four weeks, furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, and not disturbing the complainant.

Etwari Turiya 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. 5775 of 2019

¶3

Etwari Turiya

¶4

Jugeshwar Turiya @ Turi

¶5

Dwarika Turiya … Petitioners Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand 2. Poonam Devi … Opposite Parties

¶7

------

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

For the Petitioners : Mr. Anjani Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. R.K. Sinha, Addl. P.P.

¶10

------

¶11

Order No.04 Dated- 12.09.2019

¶12

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.557 of 2018 registered under sections 323/379/498A of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

¶14

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is the elder brother-in-law (Bhaisur), petitioner no.2 is the younger brother-in-law (Dewar) and petitioner no.3 is the father-in-law of the complainant-opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioners are false and are general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that the main allegation is against the husband of the complainant-opposite party no.2. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake not to annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶16

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

¶17

above named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail 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 S.D.J.M., Koderma, in connection with Complaint Case No.557 of 2018 with the condition that the petitioners will not annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

Sonu-

Etwari Turiya v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Etwari Turiya 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

Shashi Prakash Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sunny Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Robert Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naresh Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kashyap Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand