The High Court confirmed an interim order granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a complaint case involving dowry harassment and alleged torture under Sections 498A and 323 IPC.
Confirmation of interim anticipatory bail order granted to the petitioner on 5.3.2020.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 1460 of 2020
Brahmanand Dueby. …..Petitioner
Versus
-----
Coram: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
-------- For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Geasen, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shekhar Sinha, APP. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Deepak Kumar Dubey, Advocate --------
04/15-06-2020 Heard the parties.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.688 of 2018.
A complaint case was instituted, from which it appears that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized on 10.7.2016 with the petitioner. It has been stated that cash as well as various articles were given as dowry to the petitioner. It has further been stated that further dowry demand was made and on non fulfillment of which, O.P. No. 2 was variously tortured including putting more salt in her food. The complaint petition is replete with various allegations, which involve petitioner as well as inlaws of the complainant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to keep the O.P. No.2 with him with full honor and dignity. It has been submitted that cognizance has been taken only under sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and not under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has referred to the complaint petition and has stated about the torture committed upon the O.P. No. 2 by the petitioner and others. He has further submitted that the O.P. No. 2 is not being maintained and an application has already been filed by the O.P. No. 2 under section 125 of Cr.P.C., which is still pending.
It appears from the allegations levelled in the complaint petition that most of them are general and omnibus in nature and attributed to the petitioner as well as the inlaws of O.P. No. 2. The O.P. No. 2, as stated above, has already filed an application under section 125 of C.P.C., which is still pending. The petitioner has shown his willingness to keep the O.P. No.2 with him with full honor and dignity.
Regard being had to the aforesaid facts, the interim order of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner on 5.3.2020 is hereby confirmed.
This application stands allowed and disposed of.
Rakesh/-
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to confirm the interim order of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner.
Whether the petitioner's willingness to maintain the wife precludes arrest apprehension.
Brahmanand Dueby
The State of Jharkhand
Sristi Kumari
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
