Allowed¶15

MD Imran Khan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Jul 2024A.B.A./332/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A.B.A. No. 332 of 2024; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Ambuj Nath, J.; anticipatory bail granted; Md. Imran Khan v. The State of Jharkhand & Akida Khatoon; Complaint Case No. 367 of 2020; Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC; Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.; Judicial Magistrate 1st class Giridih; marriage dated 16.03.2008; alleged dowry demand of Rupees Two Lakhs; opposite party conceded no injury; surrender within two weeks; bail bond Rs.25,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender before the court below within two weeks and be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. ¶15

MD Imran Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 332 of 2024

¶3

-------

¶4

Md. Imran Khan …... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand 2. Akida Khatoon .…. …. Opp. Parties --------

¶7

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶8

-------For the Petitioner : Mr. P. C. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P For the Opp. Party No.2 : Mr. Ayub Ansari, Advocate --------

¶9

06/ Dated 03.07.2024

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 367 of 2020, for the offences under Sections 498A, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Smt. Priya Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class, Giridih.

¶12

Petitioner is the husband of opposite party No.2. Their marriage was solemnized on 16.03.2008. It is alleged that to enforce the demand of Rupees Two Lakhs, she was driven away from her matrimonial home.

¶13

It was submitted that opposite party No.2 has not sustained any injury at the hands of the petitioner. It was further submitted that she has willfully deserted from her matrimonial home and she does not want to reside with her in-laws.

¶14

Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but conceded the fact that opposite party No.2 has not sustained any injury at the hands of the petitioner.

¶15

Considering the aforesaid fact, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He is directed to surrender before the court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the learned court below on his surrender shall release him 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 Smt. Priya Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class, Giridih, or her successor, in connection with Complaint Case No. 367 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶16

BS/

¶17

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

MD Imran Khan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Imran Khan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukhtar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Aftab Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nasruddin Ansari Alias Nasurddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tajbul Alias Tajamul Mian Alias Tajbul Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vikas Seth Vs the State of Jharkhand