High CourtsSingle Bench

Suman Kumar Yadav vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 29 September 2021 · Citation: (2021) 09 JH CK 0055

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 498A · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 4 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 7262 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

12 paragraphs · 393 words

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

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 C. Case No.681 of 2019 instituted under Sections 498-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for petitioner seeks permission of this Court to implead the informant as opposite party No.2 of the instant anticipatory bail application.

Permission is accorded.

The petitioner is directed to incorporate the name of the informant as opposite party No.2 of the instant anticipatory bail application within one week.

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 two 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 allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being husband of the informant treated his wife with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that because of marital discord between the parties, this false case has been foisted against the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

List this case on 01.12.2021.

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 01.12.2021. In case of the petitioner being arrested by the police on or before 01.12.2021, 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 C. Case No.681 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.