Allowed

Ritesh Kumar Ojha v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Mar 2021A.B.A./584/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a bigamy and dowry matter. The petitioner undertook to pay Rs.1,50,000/- as interim victim compensation. The compensation payment via demand draft to the informant was directed to be adjusted in any future maintenance proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- as interim victim compensation, subject to conditions for appearing before investigation officer. Compensation to be adjusted in maintenance proce

Ritesh Kumar Ojha Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 584 of 2021

¶2

Ritesh Kumar Ojha … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶3

------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. R.R. Ravi Das, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate ------

¶6

Order No.03 Dated- 16.03.2021

¶7

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

¶9

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶10

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Golmuri P.S. Case No.125 of 2020 registered under sections 494/495/498A/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under section 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

¶11

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has treated his wife with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry and is involved in bigamy and suppressing the fact that he was earlier married and has a son, he has again solemnized marriage with the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are false and the allegation that the petitioner has earlier solemnized marriage with Sangita Muthu is false and baseless, rather Sangita Muthu is a spinster and in the rent agreement of her land lord in respect of different accommodation, she has been described as daughter of M. Shiva Rao and in this respect, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards annexure-3 (page nos. 25-26) of the brief which is the copy of the rent agreement dated 05.07.2020. It is then

¶12

submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is still ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the informant but the informant is not desirous to resume conjugal life with the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay Rs.1,50,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the informant without prejudice to his defence in this case and undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶14

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 petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four months from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs.1,50,000/- as ad interim victim compensation drawn in favour of informant 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 Judicial Magistrate -1^st Class, Jamshedpur, in connection with Golmuri P.S. Case No.125 of 2020 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶15

In case, the petitioner deposits the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.

¶16

In case, the aforesaid amount is received by the informant, the same shall be adjusted with respect to the maintenance in any present or future proceeding between the parties or final settlement between the parties, if and when the same takes place.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Sonu/Gunjan-

Ritesh Kumar Ojha v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Kumar Ojha 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

Ashok Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shyam Kishore Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashish Kumar Mishra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Awanish Kumar Alias Kinu Kumar Gukpta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shivam Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hitesh v Shah Vs Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation