2025:JHHC:36353 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.385 of 2025 …. Viki Choudhary Aged about 25 years, Son of Om Prakash Choudhary, Resident of Village-Gokulpur, Post Office and Police Station – Maheshpur, District-Pakur (Jharkhand) ……Appellant Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Gudiya Bhuimali Daughter of Laltu Bhuimali, Wife of Viki Choudhary, presently residing at Village=Gokul Nagar, Post Office and Police Station – Maheshpur, District-Pakur (Jharkhand) ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mrs. Nitu Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Sweta Singh, APP For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Peeyush K. Choudhary, Advocate …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT Order No.07/03rd December 2025 1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the impugned order dated 19.03.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.63 of 2025 by Sri Kumar Kranti Prasad, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Pakur by which the prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.08/2024 instituted under Sections 498-A, 323 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which is pending before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-Cum-Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Pakur. 2. As per FIR arising out of Complaint Case No.8/24, the appellant is alleged to have abused the Informant in the name of her caste and also alleged that the appellant has merely married the informant in order to escape from rigors of rape case. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the 2025:JHHC:36353 2 appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the appellant is still ready to keep his wife with full honor and dignity. It is submitted that the allegation of committing rape upon the Informant is false and concocted. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, the appellant has married with the Informant on 03.07.2022. It is submitted that even the allegation of assaulting by needle is also not correct. It is submitted that the appellant had instituted the case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act vide Original Suit No.131 of 2023 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Pakur, which is pending. It is submitted that the Informant has also instituted maintenance case against the appellant vide Original Maintenance Case no.238 of 2024 and the said maintenance case there is neither allegation of demand of dowry and nor any torture as she has given in her complaint and hence prayer of the anticipatory bail of the appellant may be allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellant. 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 has also opposed the prayer of the appellant. It is submitted that the appellant had abused the Informant in the name of her caste. It is further submitted that the appellant had married with the Informant to save himself from the rigors of criminal case. It is further submitted that the appellant is not taking care of his wife. It is submitted that the complainant and her witnesses have fully corroborated and supported the prosecution case and hence the prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears from the complaint case i.e. Complaint Case No.8/24, that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 01.06.2024 and 22.06.2024 but the 2025:JHHC:36353 3 complainant case was filed on 28.10.2024 i.e. after delay of more than four (04) months. 7. It also appears that the allegation of abusing the appellant in the name of her caste took place of his house. 8. It also appears that the appellant has also admitted that the Informant-Respondent No.2 is his wife and he has also filed Original Suit No.131 of 2023 before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Pakur under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights against the Respondent No2. 9. It also appears the that Informant-Respondent No.2 has also filed maintenance case i.e. Original maintenance case no.238/2024 for grant of maintenance from the appellant, which is also pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Pakur. 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of this case and also considering that both the parties are husband and wife, the appellant namely Viki Choudhary is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the appellant is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing his bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction Sri Kumar Kranti Prasad, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Pakur in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.08/2024. 11. The impugned order dated 19.03.2025 passed by Sri Kumar Kranti Prasad, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, in A.B.P. No.63 of 2025 is set aside. 12. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.385 of 2025 is allowed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated 03.12.2025 Nishant/-