Ghanshyam Saw vs State of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Mr. Satish Kumar - learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

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

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.21 of 2019 instituted under Section 323/379/354/498-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the D.P. Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

Let notice be issued to O.P. No.2 under registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within three weeks by the petitioner, failing which, this anticipatory bail application shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the complainant/opposite party No.2 and the allegations against the petitioner are all false and general and omnibus in nature. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. List this case on 15.12.2020.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts as discussed, I am inclined to pass an interim order of anticipatory bail to the petitioner till 15.12.2020. In case of the petitioner being arrested by the police on or before 15.12.2020, he shall be released on bail provisionally on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the officer concerned in connection with Complaint Case No.21 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.