Allowed

Sumit Mukherjee v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Nov 2020A.B.A./3231/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused under sections 498A, 323, and 34 of the IPC. Bail was conditioned on depositing Rs. 30,000 as interim victim compensation and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to depositing Rs. 30,000 as interim compensation and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties.

Sumit Mukherjee Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3231 of 2020

¶2

Sumit Mukherjee

¶3

Pratima Mukherjee … Petitioners Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

Anju Panda @ Anju Mukherjee … Opposite Parties

¶6

------

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate ------

¶9

Order No.03 Dated- 03.11.2020

¶10

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶11

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.152 of 2018 registered under sections 498A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and are general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that the petitioner no.1 is ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the opposite party no.2. It is then submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to jointly pay Rs. 30,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the complainant-opposite party no.2 without prejudice to their defence in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the opposite party no.2 is not ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the petitioner no.1.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs. 30,000/- as ad interim victim compensation in favour of complainant-opposite party no.2 and 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 J.M. 1^st Class, Ramgarh, in connection with Complaint Case No.152 of 2018 subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶17

In case, the petitioners deposit the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the complainant-opposite party no.2 and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.

¶18

If the petitioners deposit the ad interim victim compensation to the complainant-opposite party no.2, the same shall be adjusted towards maintenance or one time settlement if and when the same takes place between the parties.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶20

Sonu/Gunjan-

Sumit Mukherjee v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Mukherjee 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

Barik Sah Alias MD Barique Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mehtab Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Agarwal Alias Mukesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sukulmoni Baskey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Awesh Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand