Allowed

Abhijit Sagar Goutam v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jul 2023A.B.A./296/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition for anticipatory bail, the High Court of Jharkhand observed that the petitioner is cooperating with investigation and found no necessity for arrest. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within four weeks, furnishing a bond of Rs. 40,000 with sureties, and abiding by specific conditions including mobile number continuity.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks with a bond of Rs. 40,000 and two sureties of like amount.

Abhijit Sagar Goutam Vs the State of Jharkhand — Domestic Violence | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 296 of 2023

¶3

Abhijit Sagar Goutam …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

Poonam Kumari ……Opposite parties

¶7

----------

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶9

-----

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. M.B. Lal, Advocate.

¶11

Order No.07/ Dated:05.07.2023

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 136 of 2021 instituted under Sections 498A/ 323/ 324/ 307/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code & Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act, the petitioner has moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

As per F.I.R., there is allegation of assault and domestic violence on the informant by the accused persons. It is also alleged that her father-in-law and husband had taken Rs. 25,00,000/- cash, gold ornaments of 250 grams and other items worth Rs. 7,00,000/- as additional dowry.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the F.I.R. Real fact is that marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the informant in the year 2017 but their temperament could not tally and the petitioner was forced to file divorce suit before the Principal Judge Family Court Dhanbad vide Matrimonial Suit No. 713 of 2019. During pendency of the said suit conciliation was started by the court and informant came to her matrimonial home but still her conduct and behavior was not compatible with the petitioner and other family members and she lodged this false case for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is Senior Finance Manger in Central Coal Field Limited, Ranchi. There is purportedly false allegation in the

¶16

FIR about demand of Rs. 25 lacs as additional dowry. It is further submitted that in this case while petitioner went to mediation in DLSA Dhanbad in connection with the divorce case, present petitioner was brutally assaulted by his father-in-law, brother-in-law for which he has instituted F.I.R. against the family members of the informant in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 366 of 2021 registered for the offence under Section341, 323, 325, 34 of the Indian Penal Code in which charge sheet has been submitted against the accused persons and charge has also been framed. As a matter of revenge, informant has also lodged a counter case i.e. Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 367 of 2021, except that there is no criminal background of the present petitioner. Petitioner has also complied with the notice issued under Section 41 (A) Cr.p.c. and co-operating in the investigation of this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to further co-operate with the investigation of the case and also abide by all terms and conditions which may be imposed in the matter of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶17

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner about demand of huge dowry and consequent physical and mental torture meted out with the informant, due to its non-fulfillment and also of physical assault. Mediation between the parties has also been failed, hence, petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

¶18

Considering the factual background of the case, pendency of the case and counter case between the parties, as a matter of fact petitioner is co-operating in the investigation, hence, there is no necessity of arrest of the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the overall aspect of the case, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1^st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 136 of 2021 with the condition that he will co-

¶20

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.

¶21

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶22

R.K/

Abhijit Sagar Goutam v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhijit Sagar Goutam 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

Birbal Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mansa Hembram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Basir Mian Alias MD Vasir Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arvind Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rintu Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kabirul Shekh Vs the State of Jharkhand