Dhaneshwar Das v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 323, 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 ss. 3, 4
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 s. 9
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, Advocate For the State For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Ashutosh Sahadeo, Advocate. : Mr. Azeemuddin, A.P.P. 04/24.04.2023 Heard the parties. ---- Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 177 of 2022, for the offences registered under Sections 323 & 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of Miss Manya Tandan, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar. Petitioner is the husband of the opposite party No.2 Sangeeta Devi. Their marriage was solemnized in the year 2015. It is alleged that there was demand of dowry and to enforce the demand, opposite party No.2 was tortured and ultimately she was driven away from her matrimonial home. It was submitted that the opposite party No.2 is residing in her maika since the year 2017. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. It was further submitted that the opposite party No.2 has not sustained any injury at the hands of the petitioner. Mr. Ashutosh Sahadeo, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 has vehemently opposed the prayer for Anticipatory Bail. However, he did not dispute the fact that the opposite party No.2 has sustained any injury at the hands of the petitioner. Regard being had to the facts and circumstance of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. He is directed to surrender before the court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and learned court below on his surrender shall release him on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Miss Manya Tandan, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar or her successor in connection with Complaint Case No. 177 of
2022. Subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. Jay/- (Ambuj Nath, 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.