Allowed

Amit Kumar Agarwal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Sept 2021A.B.A./4293/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case. The court directed the petitioner to surrender within four months, deposit Rs. 1,50,000 as interim compensation, and furnish a bail bond with conditions, applicable to the underlying case.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with a direction to surrender within four months, deposit Rs. 1,50,000 as interim compensation, and furnish a bail bond with two sureties.

Amit Kumar Agarwal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.4293 of 2021

¶2

------

¶3

Amit Kumar Agarwal .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand .... .... 2. Kumari Hemlata Gupta ....Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

------ For the Petitioner : Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. M.B. Lal, Adv.

¶7

Order No.03 Dated- 15.09.2021

¶8

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶9

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.266 of 2020 instituted under Sections 498-A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not ready and willing to resume the conjugal life with the opposite party no.2 but the opposite party no.2 is ready and willing to resume the conjugal life with the petitioner. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being husband of the opposite party no.2 treated her with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case and undertakes to pay ad interim victim compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- without prejudice to his defence in this case to the opposite party no.2. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned Spl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within four months from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, the petitioner will be enlarged on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs.1,50,000/- as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to his defence in this case drawn in favour of the opposite party no.2 and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of

¶13

the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Dhanbad in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.266 of 2020 with the condition that he will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶14

In case the petitioner deposits the said demand draft, the court below is directed to issue notice to the opposite party No.2 and on her proper identification, the court below shall handover the same to her forthwith.

¶15

In case the petitioner deposits Rs.1,50,000/- in favour of the opposite party No.2, the same shall be adjusted towards maintenance, if any or full and final settlement, if any, between the parties.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Pappu/

Amit Kumar Agarwal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Agarwal 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

Gopi Nath Das Vs Union of India through CBI

Babul Yadav Alias Manish Yadav Alias Babul Kumar Yadav Alias Manish Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jagdish Paswan Alias Jagdish Ram Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naren Tiriya Alias Narayan Tiriya Alias Naren Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prashant Bajpai Vs Union of India through CBI

Sonu Ravi Das Vs the State of Jharkhand