Chandan Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 3956 of 2024

¶3

Chandan Kumar Singh` ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party

¶4

--------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶5

-------- For the Petitioner : Mr. IndraJit Sinha, Advocate. : Mr. Awinash Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, A.P.P. --------- Order No. 05/Dated: 2^nd July, 2024

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Garhwa (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 14 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 307, 506 of the I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohbition Act., pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa.

¶8

As per FIR, allegation is that informant was married with petitioner in the year 2011 and she has two children, but her husband always demanding additional dowry as Rs.500,000/- cash and due to non-fulfilment of the same, she was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally. Informant’s brother had given Rs. 1,95,000/to the petitioner, but on 11.05.2022, petitioner assaulting her very badly by tying her hands and closed the mouth and also he stopped providing food to her and tried to killed her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner is languishing in Judicial Custody since 28.02.2024 and the materials collected during investigation does not belong to the prosecution story. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or

¶10

P a g e 1 | 3

¶11

influencing the witnesses of prosecution. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail.

¶12

Learned A.P.P. was directed to file counter affidavit before three weeks’ ago, but he has not filed counter affidavit.

¶13

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel appearing for the informant/O.P. No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner is very poorly treating with his wife, having anal intercourse and by penetrating wood stick. Hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.

¶14

From provision of record, it appears that marriage of the petitioner with the informant was solemnized in the year, 2011 and both are blessed with two children, one child is 10 years old and other one is 6 years old. Children are resided with their mother. There is allegation levelled by the informant that petitioner was demanded Rs.5,00,000/- as additional dowry and subjecting her to cruelty. Informant’s brother given Rs.1,95,000/- to the bank account of her husband. It is alleged that on 11.05.2022, the petitioner taken her along with their sons to a flat situated at Buti More, where he tied her hands and legs and gagged her mouth by cloths and penetrated danda and rod in her private part and also tried to kill her by pressing her neck. Medical report of the victim also shows that multiple abrasion on records left side thigh, back side, abrasion on left leg and whole body pain. No other injury has been mentioned in the injury report. Now, charge sheet has been submitted. Petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation.

¶15

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation coupled with the materials available against the petitioner and no criminal background, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

¶16

P a g e 2 | 3

¶17

each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa in connection with Garhwa (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 14 of 2022 subject to the conditions:-

¶18

(1) Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

¶19

(2) Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.

¶20

(3) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses.

¶21

In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions, the bail of the petitioner shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned Trial Court itself.

¶22

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶23

Simran

¶24

P a g e 3 | 3

Chandan Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Kumar Singh 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

Krishna Purty Vs the State of Jharkhand

Harshit Kujur Alias Harsid Kujur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prince Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subodh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Devraj Sarkar Alias Nimua Alias Nimai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bishun Manjhi Alias Bishnu Manjhi Alias Bishun Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand