Dismissed

Laljit Mahto Alias Laljit Prasad v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jul 2021B.A./5238/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail allowed by the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi.”. The learned Judge rejected bail application of a husband accused of his wife's disappearance. The court found strong suspicion against petitioner and no evidence implicating a third party. Trial expedited.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial against petitioner directed to be expedited.

Laljit Mahto Alias Laljit Prasad Vs the State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B. A. No. 5238 of 2021

¶3

¶4

Laljit Mahto @ Laljit Prasad … … Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶7

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Manindra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Shekhar Sinha, P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate ---

¶8

3/05.07.2021 Heard the parties.

¶9

Defect no. 9 (i) as pointed out by the office is ignored.

¶10

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case

¶11

No. 24 of 2019.

¶12

The marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 1995. On 02.09.2018, the informant came to know that his daughter is missing for the last 15 days and she could not be traced out and he also came to know that the petitioner has solemnized another marriage with one Urmila.

¶13

It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier the wife of the petitioner had instituted a case against Mukesh Yadav being Bagodar P. S. Case No. 167 of 2017. It has further been stated while referring to the sanha instituted by the daughter of the petitioner that on 28.07.2018, one Mukesh Mandal had enticed and eloped with her mother. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2021 and in fact some of the witnesses in course of investigation had stated about good relations prevailing between the petitioner and his wife.

¶14

Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and has stated while referring to paragraph 66 of the case diary that Mukesh Mandal had not come to his house for six months as he had gone for work outside. He has further stated that in course of investigation, nothing has come about Mukesh Mandal enticing away the wife of the petitioner.

¶15

-2-

¶16

Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the informant has also opposed the prayer and has referred to the Sanha instituted by the daughter of the informant stating that absurd and improbable story has been created by her as though she admits that no one was present in the house which contradicts the allegation about Mukesh Mandal of enticing away her mother.

¶17

The petitioner appears to be the husband of the daughter of the informant. The wife of the petitioner is still traceless. It appears that there is no evidence either direct or indirect to suggest that it was Mukesh Mandal who has eloped with the wife of the petitioner. In fact, it appears that the daughter of the petitioner is in his custody and the Sanha which was registered was after a considerable length of time. It is also to be noted herein that in the said Sanha, the daughter of the petitioner has stated that no one was present in the house and therefore, it is absolutely impossible to cast insinuation upon Mukesh Mandal that it was he, who had enticed away the wife of the petitioner.

¶18

Since strong suspicion has been cast against the petitioner of causing disappearance of his wife, I am not inclined to allow this application and the same is hereby rejected.

¶19

However, the trial may be expedited.

¶20

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

¶21

R. Shekhar Cp 3

Laljit Mahto Alias Laljit Prasad v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laljit Mahto Alias Laljit Prasad 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kartik Gorai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dukhi Yadav Alias Dukhit Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Prabesh Sao Alias Ramu Sao Alias Ram Prabesh Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sajan Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rabinder Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahadeo Tudu Vs the State of Jharkhand