Allowed

Rajesh Murmu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Oct 2020A.B.A./907/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry and torture case where a mediator reported a settlement between parties, directing surrender within four weeks subject to a bail bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks; directed to furnish bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount.

Rajesh Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 907 of 2020

¶3

¶4

Rajesh Murmu. ….. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

Lakhimani Manjhi. …. Opposite Parties

¶8

Coram: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶9

For the Petitioner : Miss. Shreyanashi Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Hatim, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Hemant Jain, Advocate --------

¶10

05/9-10-2020

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with C.C. Case No. 450

¶13

of 2018.

¶14

The complaint petition reveals that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the petitioner on 20.06.2016. After marriage, there was a demand of Rs.1,20,000/- as dowry and on account of non fulfillment of which the complainant was subjected to torture. It has been alleged that the petitioner had also solemnised a second marriage.

¶15

Pursuant to the order dated 7.8.2020, the petitioner as well as O.P. No. 2 had appeared before the Mediator and the report of the Mediator, which is on record, indicates that the matter has been settled by the parties and the terms and conditions as agreed upon are that both shall file a petition for dissolution of marriage on mutual consent and as per the demand of the O.P. No. 2, Rs.2,00,000/- shall be paid by the petitioner as permanent alimony towards full and final settlement.

¶16

In view of the report of the Mediator which indicates that the matter has been settled between the parties, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

The petitioner, named above, is accordingly directed to surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and in that event, he will be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- ( Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella in connection with C.C. Case No. 450 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

This application stands allowed.

¶19

( Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

¶20

Rakesh/-

Rajesh Murmu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Murmu 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

Karar Hussain Alias Karar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Saro Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manish Kumar Singh Vs Union of India Ncb

Arbind Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitu Bauri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Zuber Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand