Mohammad Shoaib Ansari vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stam Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown

is over.

In view of the personal undertaking given by 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 Mahila P.S. Case No. 06 of

2021 registered under Sections 498A, 420, 323, 307, 354, 120B, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of D.P.Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner treated the informant-opposite party

no. 2 with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and those allegations

are general and omnibus in nature hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Let notice be issued to Opposite Party No. 2. The petitioner is directed to file requisites of notice through both processes i.e. under registered postwith

A/D as well as through ordinary process within two weeks, failing which, this anticipatory bail application shall stand dismissed without further

reference to the Bench.

List this case on 26.10.2021.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to pass an interim order of anticipatory bail to the petitioner

provisionally till 26.10.2021. In case of the petitioner being arrested by the police on or before 26.10.2021, the petitioner shall be released on bail

provisionally on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

the officer concernedin connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 06 of 2021 subject to the conditionslaid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.