Anticipatory bail application in a complaint case under Sections 323/341/354/498A/34 IPC. The court declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to seek regular bail before the trial court within three weeks, to be decided per Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.947 of 2024
Md. Meraj Ansari, S/o Majhar Ansari, R/o Village-Foolsarai, P.O. & P.S.-Giddi, District-Hazaribag.
.......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
.......... Opp. Parties.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
----For the Petitioner : Md. Zaid Ahmad, Advocate For the State : Ms. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Aman Dayal Singh, Advocate -----
Order No.09 Date: 21.11.2024
the case of “Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.” reported in 2024 (9) SCC
198.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Vikas/
-2-
A.B.A. No.947 of 2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a complaint case under Sections 323/341/354/498A/34 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.Relied on¶2
2022 (10) SCC 51 · Who else cites this
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.Relied on¶2
2024 (9) SCC 198 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Meraj Ansari
The State of Jharkhand
Salma Khatoon
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
