High CourtsSingle Bench

Birbal Oraon vs State of Jharkhand And Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 18 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 JH CK 0152

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 365, 420, 498A, 504, 506 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 875 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 466 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No.39 of 2020 registered under sections 498A/420/504/506/365/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/4 of the D.P. Act.

It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that both the petitioner and the opposite party no.2 are ready and willing to resume conjugal life. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner undertakes that he will keep and maintain the opposite party no.2 as his lawful wife with full dignity and honour. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the opposite party no.2 will cooperate with the petitioner in resuming their conjugal life. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations against the petitioner are false and the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on satisfying the court below concerned that he has taken the opposite party no.2 with him and is keeping and maintaining her with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Lohardaga, in connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No.39 of 2020 with the condition that the petitioner will continue keeping and maintaining the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife and will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case with further conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.