Dismissed¶16

Mustak Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Sept 2024B.A./3900/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mustak Ansari v. The State of Jharkhand, B.A. No.3900 of 2024, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Subhash Chand, J.), dated 07/09.09.2024. Bail application under Sections 363/366A/506 IPC (Kairo P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 / S.T. Case No.174 of 2023) rejected. Grounds: victim's consistent statements under Ss. 161/164 Cr.PC and trial testimony alleging enticement with intent to marry by coercion, forcible signature on paper; trial commenced. Advocates: Altamash Khan for petitioner; Rajneesh Vardhan, APP for State. No precedent cited; no monetary quantum.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected because, in view of the victim's categorical statement that she was enticed away by the petitioner with intent to get her married by way of coercion. ¶16

Mustak Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No.3900 of 2024

¶3

Mustak Ansari aged about 26 years, S/o Fajluddin Ansari, R/o ill- Nantilo, PO & PS Kuru, District Lohardaga. ..... … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶6

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶7

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Altamash Khan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, APP

¶8

¶9

07/09.09.2024 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for

¶10

the State.

¶11

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant– Mustak Ansari with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Kairo P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 (S.T. Case No.174 of 2023) registered under Sections 363/366A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga.

¶12

The FIR of this case was lodged by the father of victim with these allegations that on 31.05.2023 at 15:00 O'clock he came to know that his daughter 17 years old was missing from the house. Search was made but no whereabout was known and it came to know that Mustak Ansari had enticed her away with intent to get marry with her. He had also criminally intimidated her and on 01.06.2023 the written information was given to the police station concerned.

¶13

During investigation, statement of victim was recorded under section 161 of Cr.PC in which she stated that Mustak Ansari was mason and she was female labour with him. He had received the mobile number of her and threatened that she would talk only with him. On 31.05.2023 Mustak Ansari called her over the phone to his house known at Nantilo, Kudu. When she reached there, his family members hurled abuse and created pressure to get married forcibly. Her signature were also got on a blank paper stating therein that she had come on account of her own will. The statement of victim under section 164 of Cr.PC was also recorded in which she also corroborated the prosecution story and reiterated almost all the

¶14

allegations as made in her restatement. The trial in this case has commenced. Victim was also examined in which she categorically stated that it was accused Mustak Ansari who took her to his village Nantilo and pressurized her to get married. He also forcibly got her signature signature on a paper.

¶15

In view of statement of victim in which she categorically stated that victim was enticed her away by the petitioner with intent to get her married by way of coercion.

¶16

In view of the above, the bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.

¶17

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶18

RKM

¶19

Mustak Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mustak Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hari Tiwari Alias Dhirendra Tiwari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jarman Kerai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manish Kumar Karan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chambar Singh Pahan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Harijan Jamuda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bagun Hembrom Vs the State of Jharkhand