Allowed

Nundeo Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Jul 2021A.B.A./930/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners alleged of dowry cruelty and attempted murder. The court directed surrender within six weeks, furnishing a bond and conditions for cooperation with investigation and non-disturbance of the informant.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with condition to surrender within six weeks, furnish bond of Rs.25,000 each with sureties, cooperate with investigation, appear when noticed, and not annoy the informant.

Nundeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.930 of 2020

¶2

------

¶3

Nundeo Yadav @ Nundeo Mahto

¶4

Jamun Mahto

¶5

Gandhari Devi .... .... …. Petitioners Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Fuli Devi .... .... ....Opposite Parties

¶8

------

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Addl.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : None

¶11

Order No.07 Dated- 16.07.2021

¶12

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶13

Though, the notice has been validly served upon opposite party no.2 yet no one turns on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶14

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Sarwan P.S. Case No. 66 of 2019 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 498-A, 504, 379, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 being husband, the petitioner no.2 being father-in-law and the petitioner no.3 being mother-in-law of the opposite party no.2 treated the opposite party no.2 with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry and attempted to murder the informant as well as committed theft of all her ornaments and deserted her from matrimonial house. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners and the informant have settled the matter outside of the Court and the petitioner no.1 and the opposite party no.2 are leading a happy conjugal life. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶17

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M., Deoghar in connection with Sarwan P.S. Case No. 66 of 2019 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and with condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

Pappu/

Nundeo Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nundeo Yadav 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

Naina Jhari Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arun Agarwala Alias Arun Kumar Bakrewalla Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Turi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mundrika Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Mahtha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subhash Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand