Disposed

Abdul Rahman Alias Abdul Rahman Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Jul 2023A.B.A./298/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ jurisdiction matter regarding an apprehension of arrest in a dowry harassment case involving IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act sections, the High Court disposed of the anticipatory bail application without expressing merits and directed the petitioner to seek regular bail in the trial court as per Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; petitioner directed to seek regular bail from the trial court complying with Apex Court guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil.

Abdul Rahman Alias Abdul Rahman Ansari Vs the State of… — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 298 of 2023

¶3

Abdul Rahman @ Abdul Rahman Ansari

¶4

…… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Aasama Khatun ……Opposite parties

¶8

----------

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶10

-----

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohit Agarwal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Md. Zaid Imam, Advocate …..

¶12

Order No.06/ Dated:13.07.2023

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 295 of 2021 instituted under Sections 323, 498-A/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner has moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

As per Complaint case, there is an allegation of demand of additional dowry in the shape of Apache motorcycle and cash of Rs. 2,00,000/- and due to nonfulfillment of which she was subjected to mental and physical torture by the petitioner and his family members. It is alleged that accused persons tried to kill her by pouring kerosene oil, but somehow she managed to escape from there.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner is the husband of the complainant and marriage was solemnized 18 years ago. Petitioner is ready and is willing to keep and maintain her with full dignity and honor. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial 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 opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶18

It is a complaint case and custodial trial of the accused is not required, hence, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this anticipatory bail application is disposed off.

¶19

Petitioner is directed to seek regular bail before learned trial court which shall be disposed of in strict compliance of the guidelines issued by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr reported in 2021(10) SCC 773.

¶20

Learned trial court is also directed to take notice of fresh observation of Hon’ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in 2023- SCC online (SC) 452 & 2023- Live Law (SC) 233 .

¶21

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶22

R.K/

Abdul Rahman Alias Abdul Rahman Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rahman Alias Abdul Rahman Ansari 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abbas Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashish Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suraj Kumar Mirdha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pintu Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanhaiya Jasiwal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rohit Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand