Allowed

Rohit Kandhwe Alias Rohit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Oct 2021A.B.A./3014/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal for anticipatory bail, the High Court of Jharkhand allowed the petitioner's prayer upon receiving a personal undertaking. The petitioner must deposit an interim victim compensation amount and provide a bail bond to be released if arrested.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail conditional upon depositing Rs. 1,23,000/- as victim compensation and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- if arrested.

Rohit Kandhwe Alias Rohit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B. A. No. 3014 of 2021

¶3

Rohit Kandhwe @ Rohit Kumar … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand & Anr. … Opposite Parties

¶6

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav ,Adv. For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha ,Addl. P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. P. Lala, Adv.

¶8

04 / 04.10.2021 Heard the parties.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitionerpersonally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

¶10

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioner the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

¶11

Apprehending his arrest, the petitionerhas moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with C.P.Case No. 2375 of 2018 registered under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of D.P.Act.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the husband of the complainant-opposite party no. 2, treated her with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the trial of the case and he is also ready and willing to pay Rs. 1,23,000/- to the opposite party no. 2 as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to his defence hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶14

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 six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 1,23,000/- by way of demand draft drawn in favour of the opposite party no. 2 as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to his defence 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 J.M.F.C., Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No. 2375 of 2018 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with thetrial of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶15

In case of depositing aforesaid demand draft by the petitioner, learned court below is directed to issue notice to the opposite party no. 2 and release the demand draft in her favour on proper identification forthwith and if the said amount is deposited by the petitioner, the same will be adjusted towards maintenance in any proceeding between the parties in future or the final settlement, if any, takes place between the parties.

¶16

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶17

Smita/-

Rohit Kandhwe Alias Rohit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kandhwe Alias Rohit Kumar 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

Neha Parveen Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raj Kishore Mahato Vs the State of Bihar Now the State of Jharkhand Represented by Chief Secretary

Rupesh Prasad Sah Alias Rupesh Prosad Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Wasim Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoranjan Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vivek Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand