Allowed

Rupesh Prasad Sah Alias Rupesh Prosad Sah v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Oct 2021Cr.M.P./310/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand modified an abatement bail order to allow the petitioner to surrender and be granted bail with conditions for resuming conjugal life when the opposite party joins him, reducing the surrender timeline from four months to a specific date.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019 is modified to allow the petitioner to surrender to be enlarged on bail by taking the opposite party to a rented accommodation or house at J

Rupesh Prasad Sah Alias Rupesh Prosad Sah Vs the… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No.310 of 2021

¶3

Rupesh Prasad Sah @ Rupesh Prosad Sah

¶4

… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

2. Smt. Soumya Sah @ Soumya Gupta … Opposite Parties

¶8

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

For the Petitioners : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rai, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shekhar Sinha, P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Manoj Kumar No.6, Adv. ------

¶10

Order No.07 Dated- 01.10.2021

¶11

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶12

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for modification of the order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019, the petitioner was directed to surrender before the court below within four months on the condition that the petitioner will satisfy the court below that the petitioner has taken the opposite party No.2 either to the rented accommodation in an apartment or to his house at Jamadoba and is keeping and maintaining her with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife. It is next submitted that the as the opposite party no.2 was not ready and willing to resume the conjugal life with the petitioner and hence, she did not agree to go with the petitioner. It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 that now the petitioner and the opposite party no.2 are ready and willing to resume their conjugal life and both of them agree to appear before the court below concerned on 16.11.2021 and on that date the petitioner will take the opposite party No.2 either to the rented accommodation in an apartment of to his house at Jamadoba with an undertaking that he will keep and maintain her with full honour and dignity as his lawful wife. Hence, it is submitted that the order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019, be modified accordingly.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the prayer for modification of the order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019 is allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019 is modified to the following extent:-

¶15

“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 of learned SDJM, Jamshedpur on 16.11.2021 and in case the petitioner appears and surrenders before the learned trial court on 16.11.2021, he will be enlarged on bail on taking the opposite party No.2 either to the rented accommodation in an apartment or to his house at Jamadoba with an undertaking that he will keep and maintain her with full honour and dignity as his lawful wife and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Jamshedpur in connection with Complaint Case No.3237 of 2018 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶16

In case the opposite party No.2 does not appear before learned SDJM, Jamshedpur on 16.11.2021 still the petitioner will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Jamshedpur in connection with Complaint Case No.3237 of 2018 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case with further condition that the petitioner will resume conjugal life with the opposite party No.2 as and when the opposite party No.2 joins him for resuming the conjugal life and keep and maintain her with dignity and honour as his lawful wife and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”

¶17

The order dated 19.02.2020 passed in A.B.A. No.8390 of 2019 is modified to the aforesaid extent only.

¶18

This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶20

Pappu/

Rupesh Prasad Sah Alias Rupesh Prosad Sah v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Prasad Sah Alias Rupesh Prosad Sah 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

Niranjan Kumar Yadav Alias Niranjan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deorath Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Narendra Kumar Ganatra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Neha Parveen Vs the State of Jharkhand

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

Ratnesh Kumar Kashyap Alias Sonu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand