Allowed

Smt Permila Lal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Aug 2022A.B.A./3411/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting anticipatory bail in connection with charges under Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act upon submission by applicant counsel regarding lack of direct beneficiary status, without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicants entitled to be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000 each with two sureties on conditions of cooperation and non-interference.

Smt Permila Lal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3411 of 2022

¶2

Smt. Permila Lal 2. Sanjeev Kumar ..... … Petitioners

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶5

¶6

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶7

¶8

For the Petitioners : Mrs. Seema Kumari Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kumar Jha, A.P.P.

¶9

¶10

06/11.08.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for the

¶11

State.

¶12

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicants seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Chirkunda P.S. Case No.239 of 2021 registered under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged against five named accused including the applicants with the allegations that the complainant was married with Amit Lal on 13.02.2019. After solemnization of marriage, the complainant was subjected to cruelty for non-fulfilment of additional demand of dowry and on 08.06.2021, she was ousted from the matrimonial house.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant no.1—Smt. Permila Lal is the mother-in-law of the victim and the applicant no.2—Sanjeev Kumar is not near relative, rather he is in friend circle of husband of the complainant. It is further submitted that the allegations made against all the named accused are general and omnibus and the applicants are not direct beneficiary of the alleged demand of additional dowry. The applicants have been implicated in this case with object to humiliate them on being arrested by the police.

¶15

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶16

In view of the above no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit from the State. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail, at this stage.

¶17

In the event of arrest, the abovenamed applicants, involved in the aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount

¶18

-2-

¶19

to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:-

¶20

i. The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶21

ii. The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

iii. In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶23

iv. The applicants shall co-operate in the trial before the court below and in case of non-cooperation, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicants without any reference to this Court.

¶24

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶25

Rohit

Smt Permila Lal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Permila Lal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratnsh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Mumtaz Ansari Alias Raja Vs the State of Jharkhand

Imran Seikh Alias Amran Shekh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Martom Khandait Vs the State of Jharkhand

Afsar Sk Alias Absar Shekh Alias Absar Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand

Barjahan Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand