Single judge confirmed the provisional bail granted to Suman Nayak in a matrimonial dispute involving IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act charges, noting prior mediation failure.
Provisional bail granted to the applicant via order dated 20th October, 2021 is confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10106 of 2021
Suman Nayak ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -----For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate --------
04/06.01.2022 Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant– Suman Nayak with prayer to release on bail in connection with Musabani P.S. Case No.03 of 2020 registered under Sections 406/498-A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatshila.
At the very outset learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been granted provisional bail in the aforesaid case vide order dated 20th October, 2021 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court and both the parties were directed to settle the dispute by way of compromise before the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Jamshedpur.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant and in paragraph 5 of the same, it has been deposed that the mediation has failed before the D.L.S.A., Jamshedpur, as the wife of the applicant made the un-reasonable demand of Rs.50 lacs and also asked him to reside separate from her parents and these two conditions were not acceptable to the applicant. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for confirmation of provisional bail.
In view of the submissions made and materials on record, the provisional bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 20th October, 2021 in connection with the aforesaid case is, hereby, confirmed.
Accordingly, the present bail application stands disposed of.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Tarun/Rohit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the provisional bail granted to the applicant should be confirmed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Suman Nayak
The State of Jharkhand
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
