Tukan Saw vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

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.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No. 92 of 2020 registered under sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal

Code and charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 498A, 306/34 of I.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner abetted suicide of his daughter-in-law. It is

submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that though the F.I.R. has been

lodged for offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of Indian Penal Code but after due investigation, the police has submitted charge-sheet for the

offence punishable under Section 498A, 306/34 of Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that there is no specific overt act attributed to the

petitioner which could have led his daughter-in-law to commit suicide. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of

the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.10.2020 as mentioned in paragraph 1 of the bail application. Hence it is

submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts of this case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail 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 J.M., Giridih in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No. 92 of

2020 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case.