Allowed

Ketabul Sk v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC21 Mar 2024A.B.A./979/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case alleging dowry demand, cruelty and ousting of his wife. Considering the allegations and materials on record, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including co-operation with investigation and Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; surrender within four weeks, bail bond Rs.20,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and co-operation with investigation.

Ketabul Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.979 of 2023

¶2

------

¶3

Ketabul Sk. .... .... …. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand 2. Manwara Bibi @ Manuyara Begum

¶6

------

¶7

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶8

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate Mrs. Savita Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : None

¶9

------

¶10

Order No.04 Dated- 21.03.2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Pakur(M) P.S. Case No. 29 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No. 380 of 2022 instituted under Sections 376, 498-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

As per FIR, allegation is that the marriage of informant was solemnized with the petitioner on 15.12.2013 and then she went to her matrimonial home and started residing there. The petitioner went to Hyderabad in connection to his duty and returned to his house on 22.03.2020 due to Covid-19. During Covid-19, petitioner failed to find any job then he started raising demand of dowry from the informant in the shape of Rs.4 lakhs cash for the purpose of business. Due to non-fulfillment of aforesaid demand, the informant was subjected to cruelty and physical torture and ultimately she was ousted from the matrimonial home.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and all the allegations leveled against the petitioner are entirely false and fabricated. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶16

IN spite of valid service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Pakur in connection with Pakur(M) P.S. Case No. 29 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No. 380 of 2022 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶19

Pappu/

Ketabul Sk v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ketabul Sk v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahman Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naju Sk Alias Nazu Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Mumtaz Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitendra Kumar Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Irfan Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand