Allowed

Anil Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC22 Aug 2022A.B.A./2881/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a husband accused under Sections 498A and 323 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court allowed the application subject to a bail bond and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

Anil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Domestic Violence | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A. B. A. No. 2881 of 2022

¶3

Anil Kumar . .... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Smt. Sunita Devi .. ... ...Opp. Party(s)

¶4

........... CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

......... For the Petitioner : Mr. J. N. Upadhyay, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Niki Sinha, APP For the O. P. No.2 : Mr. Rohit Agarwal, Advocate

¶6

04/ 22.08.2022 . Apprehending his arrest, petitioner above-named has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint case vide C/1 Case No.1187 of 2018 registered for the offence under Sections 498A /323 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the D. P. Act.

¶7

Heard the parties.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the marriage was solemnized in the year 2016 and the petitioner being the husband is still willing to live with the complainant, but it is the complainant who is not willing to live with the petitioner.

¶9

It is further submitted that the matter was referred before the District Family Welfare Committee so as to resolve the matter, but the said committee did not find the allegations to be true.

¶10

It is further submitted that a panchayati was also held on 23.10.2016, but the complainant did not agree to come to the house of the petitioner.

¶11

Learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the fact as discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner named above shall be released on bail 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 Court below, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

( Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. )

¶14

Sandeep/

Anil Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar 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

Prof R P Singh Alias Rakesh Pratap Singh Vs Union of India through CBI

Rajeev Ranjan Karn Vs Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation

Prof a B Chattopadhayay Alias a B Chattopadhyay Vs Union of India through CBI

Yudhisthir Hazara Alias Udhisthir Hajra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bivash Chandra Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance

Ranjit Kishore Vs the State of Jharkhand through Acb