Amit Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Amit Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Dowry and Cruelty | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed and disposed of: appellant directed to surrender in the trial court within four weeks from receipt/production of the copy of this order, and in the event of his arrest or surrender to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Seraikella in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024, subject to conditions under Section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023, together with submission of a self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and an active mobile number to be kept unchanged during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail can be obtained for the appellant through this appeal, notwithstanding that anticipatory bail application is not maintainable under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, on the grounds that the parties are husband and wife related by marriage and that the appellant undertakes to participate in the trial.

Court's answer

Considering the facts pleaded, the appellant is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this order.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of his arrest or surrender, the appellant shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Seraikella in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023.

Key takeaways

As further conditions, the appellant must submit a self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and his mobile number before the learned trial court, keep the number always active, and not change it during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.382 of 2025, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Rajesh Kumar, J.), decided 06.04.2026 (2026:JHHC:9551). Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 by Amit Kumar Tiwary, in the nature of anticipatory bail, against the impugned order dated 25.03.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.90 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Seraikella, arising from Adityapur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024 registered under Sections 498-A/504/506/34 IPC, Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3(1)(r) SC/ST (PoA) Act; the FIR complainant/victim, Sushmita Sagar, is the appellant's wife and did not appear despite notice. Counsel argued that although anticipatory bail is not maintainable under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, relief should follow because the parties are husband and wife and the appellant undertakes to participate in the trial; the State opposed the prayer. The court directed the appellant to surrender within four weeks and ordered his enlargement on bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to Section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023 conditions, additionally requiring submission of a self-attested Aadhaar Card photocopy and an active mobile number not to be changed during the case without court permission. Appeal allowed and disposed of.

2026:JHHC:9551

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.382 of 2025

Amit Kumar Tiwary, aged about 30 years, son of Shiv Dutta Tiwary, resident of 23, Road No.2, Phase 2, Aditya Garden, Industrial Area, Post Adityapur, Police Station Adityapur, District – Seraikella Kharsawan.

…. …. Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Sushmita Sagar, daughter of Arvind Sagar, resident of 130, Near Patro Clinic, Kagal Nagar, Sonari, Post Sonari, Police Station Sonari, Town Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum. …. …. Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---For the Appellant : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P. ----

08/Dated: 06^th April, 2026

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

3. It appears that the notice has been duly served upon the victim who happens to be the wife of the present appellant. However, in spite of giving several opportunities, nobody has appeared on behalf of the victim.

4. The appeal has been filed in the nature of anticipatory bail against the impugned order dated 25.03.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.90 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Seraikella in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 498-A/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act. The case is presently pending in the court of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Seraikella.

2026:JHHC:9551

5. Although anticipatory bail application is not maintainable in the case of SC/ST (PoA) Act but the point has been taken by the learned counsel for the appellant that since they are related with marriage and both are husband and wife and in such situation SC/ST (PoA) Act cannot get attracted. Further, the learned counsel submits that the appellant undertakes to participate in the trial. On these grounds, the prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Considering the above facts, the appellant, above named, is directed to surrender in the trial court within four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of the copy of this order and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Seraikella in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023 . Further, the appellant will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned trial court which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

In the result, the instant appeal stands allowed and disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Dated: 06^th April, 2026 Amar/Uploaded on 08.04.2026

Page | 2

Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.382 of 2025