Rinky Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

[ 2026:JHHC:20535 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3563 of 2023

------

Rinky Devi, aged about 27 years, Wife of – Dhananjay Prasad @ Dhananjay Prasad Ram, Daughter of – Ramnath Prasad, Resident of – Dumri, 3 No. Near Balu Doli, P.O. Jorapokhar, P.S. Jorapokhar, District Dhanbad.

¶5

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

Dhananjay Prasad @ Dhananjay Prasad Ram, Son of – Rameshwar Ram, Resident of – Near New Cinema Hall, Road Barnpur, P.O. Asansol, P.S. Asansol, District Bardhaman, State – West Bengal

¶9

.... .... .... Opposite Parties

¶10

------

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P. [through VC] For the O.P. No.2 : None

¶13

------

¶14

Order No:-08 Dated:-10-07-2026

¶15

Heard the parties.

¶16

Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party No.2 by way of substituted service of notice by publishing the contents of the notice in the daily newspaper – the Times of India, Kolkata consequent upon the opposite party No.2 is evading the service of notice issued to him in both ways i.e. through the process of the court as well as through the registered post thrice. Hence, the service of the notice upon the opposite party No.2 is sufficient. No one appears in respect of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

¶17

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party No.2 vide order dated 03.10.2023 passed in A.B.A. No. 7468 of 2023.

¶18

The brief fact of the case is that the opposite party No.2 is an accused of Dhanbad Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 313, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The opposite party No.2 was granted the privileges of anticipatory bail that he will be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- inter alia with the condition that he will keep and maintain the informant-opposite party No.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife if and when the informantopposite party No.2 is ready and willing to resume conjugal life with him. Consequent upon grant of privileges of the anticipatory bail, the opposite party No.2 of this Cr.M.P. appeared before the trial court and furnished the bail bond with the undertaking that he will keep and maintain the informant-opposite party No.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife if and when the informant-opposite party No.2 is ready and willing to resume conjugal life with him.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party No.2 took the petitioner who is his wife only for furnishing the bail bond and the petitioner was lovingly kept for a few days in her matrimonial house but thereafter, the opposite party No.2 and his family members brutally assaulted the petitioner herein causing serious injuries to her. In this respect, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the photographs of the informant and the certificate issued by the Doctor of Primary Health Centre. It is next submitted that a complaint has also been made with the police. It is further submitted that as the opposite party No.2 has violated the condition of the bail bond submitted by him before the trial court upon which he has been released on bail, hence, the bail granted to the opposite party No.2 in compliance of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in A.B.A. No. 7468 of 2023, be cancelled.

¶20

This Court takes into notice the conduct of the opposite party No.2 in not appearing before this Court despite valid service of the notice upon him. The contention of the petitioner supported by affidavit, has remained uncontroverted and the same is to be accepted to be true. Since the opposite party No.2 has violated the terms and

¶21

conditions of the bail bond furnished by him in compliance of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in A.B.A. No. 7468 of 2023, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where the privileges of anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party No.2 namely Dhananjay Prasad @ Dhananjay Prasad Ram in connection with Dhanbad Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2022 in compliance of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in A.B.A. No. 7468 of 2023 by this Court be cancelled.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail granted to the opposite party opposite party No.2 namely Dhananjay Prasad @ Dhananjay Prasad Ram in connection with Dhanbad Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2022 in compliance of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in A.B.A. No. 7468 of 2023 by this Court is cancelled and the learned trial court is directed to take all coercive steps for apprehension of the opposite party No.2 namely Dhananjay Prasad @ Dhananjay Prasad Ram for facing the trial.

¶23

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶25

Dated:- 10.07.2026 Saroj/

Rinky Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinky Devi 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

Quaium Ansari Alias Master Alias MD Kaum Khan Alias Kaum Miyan Alias Kaum Ansari Alias MD Kaum Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amaresh Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand

Purushottam Kumar Yadav Alias Fakku Alias Purshottm Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sara Malto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Smt. Fulwanti Marandi Vs Jonathan Kisku

Mamta Upadhyay Lal Vs the State of Jharkhand