MD Iqbal Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A. B. A. No. 4043 of 2023

Md. Iqbal ...... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. .…. … Opposite Parties -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Sahil, Advocate ------

¶5

04/ 01.03.2024 : Heard Mr. Randhir Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sudhir Kr. Mahto, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Sahil, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

¶6

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1675 of 2021, T.R. No. 1871 of 2022 registered under Sections 323, 341, 379, 498(A) of the I.P.C and under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the O.P. No.2. He submits that the learned Sessions Judge has provided provisional bail to the petitioner on 13.12.2022 and subsequently the same was not affirmed by order dated 25.04.2023. He submits that O.P. No.2 is not residing with the petitioner and regularly she is creating trouble. He submits that the conduct of the petitioner has been noted by several persons including Mukhia contained in annexure-2. He submits that the petitioner has made separate house for residing the O.P. No.2.

¶8

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that the petitioner is husband and allegations are there.

¶9

Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 submits that after providing provisional bail the petitioner has not kept the O.P. No.2 with dignity and again forced the O.P. No.2 to leave the matrimonial house and thereafter on intervention of police the petitioner again took her and thereafter again assaulted her.

¶10

The provisional bail was provided by the learned Sessions Judge and the annexurer-2 document suggests that conduct of the petitioner has been noted by several persons including Mukhia and the petitioner has made separate house for residing the O.P. No.2. The petitioner earns his livelihood by doing the work of driver.

¶11

In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Koderma, in

¶12

¶13

connection with Complaint Case No. 1675 of 2021, T.R. No. 1871 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the petitioner will not change his mobile number which is indicated in his Aadhar.

¶14

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶15

satyarthi-

MD Iqbal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Iqbal 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

Rakesh Kumar Alias Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitendra Kumar Singh Alias Jitendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shaligram Yadav Alias Shaligram Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nirmal Paul Vs the State of Jharkhand