Allowed

Rahul Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Feb 2022A.B.A./635/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who faced charges of rape and dowry demand. The court directed surrender within six weeks and imposed strict conditions, including cooperation with investigation and disclosure of mobile number and Aadhaar, in accordance with Section 438(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions of surrender within six weeks, cooperation with investigation, and disclosure of mobile number and Aadhaar card.

Rahul Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.635 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

Rahul Kumar Yadav .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, Addl.P.P ------

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 16.02.2022

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after resumption of the court in physical mode.

¶11

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2021 instituted under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape upon the victim and demanded dowry from the informant. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards Anneuxre-2 at page nos.12-13 of the brief, which is the copy of the certified copy of the joint compromise petition filed by the parties in the court of SDJM, Palamau, Daltonganj, it is submitted that therein it has been mentioned that now the parties have settled their matter outside the court and due to misunderstanding between the parties, this case has been foisted against the petitioner but now the informant does not want to proceed with the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶14

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

¶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 within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he 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, Palamau in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2021 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Pappu/

Rahul Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar 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

Gopal Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Afjal Quraishi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Reshma Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anjay Kumar Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laxman Rajak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Usman Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand