Md. Jaid @ Moin Ansari vs State of Jharkhand

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Vani Kumari. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that defect no. 6(b), as per Stamp Reporting dated 25.08.2020, has not been removed, which he undertakes to remove within 30 days after the physical court starts and the bail application may be heard, as it is a regular bail application of the petitioner, who is in custody since 30.10.2019.

Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the instant bail application on merits, but with condition that petitioner shall remove the defect(s) within 30 days after physical court starts.

Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order after the physical court starts so as to remove the defect(s).

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner namely, Md. Jaid @ Moin, being the husband has been made accused along with other family members in connection with Ranchi Sadar P.S. Case No. 432/2019 (S.T. No. 44/2020) for the offence registered under Sections 498A, 304B, 34 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that co-accused, Najneen Parween has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.06.2020 passed in B.A. No.3011/2020 and co-accused Wasima Khatoon has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench vide order dated 15.06.2020 passed in B.A. No.3075/2020 and the case of the petitioner is that his wife committed suicide by bolting the door from inside and the door was only opened after the roof made up of asbestos was broken down and the person entered into the room. It is not a case under Section 304B I.P.C., rather it is a case under Section 306 I.P.C., if material suggest that petitioner has abated the wife which led to commit suicide by the wife and the impugned order is error of record and petitioner is in custody since 30.10.2019, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel for the State, Mr. R.R.R. Das, Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that detail counter affidavit with regard to the place occurrence is necessary in this case and apart from that, the case diary will show whether the girl has committed suicide or not and some persons have entered into the house after breaking the roof made up of asbestos.

Learned counsel for the State has further submitted that from perusal of the case diary, it will be apparent that it is not a case that deceased has been killed by the petitioner and thereafter, bolted the room and came out from the roof, as such, detail counter affidavit is required.

Considering the rival submission of the parties, State Counsel is directed to file detail counter affidavit within a period of four weeks on the aforesaid issue including place of occurrence and post mortem report.

Put up this case after four weeks.