Dilip Prasad @ Dilip Kumar Manjhi v. Nirmala Devi
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 323, 379, 385, 504
Judgment
The State of Jharkhand 2. Surasti Devi --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY --------- …… Opposite Parties For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate : A.P.P. For the State ------------ 02 /21.03.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 323, 504, 379 & 385 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from the complaint that the accused persons, including the petitioners, caused assault to the complainant and also demanded ransom against release of husband of the complainant. A golden chain from the neck of complainant was also snatched away. It is submitted that the petitioners are husband and wife and petitioner No.1 is employed as a teacher in Bihar. Actually the dispute between the parties has been prevailing at their native place, Siwan. This case has been instituted with false allegation to harass the petitioners. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, above named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of Sri Vikram Anand, learned J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No.1996 of 2006. NKC (D. N. Upadhyay, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.