Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6748 (JHR)

AMAR RAM v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1347/2025 · 2025-02-27

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1347 of 2025 ------ Amar Ram, aged about 33 years, son of Ram Kishor Ram, resident of Village-Jariagarh, Govindpur, P.O.-Jariagarh, P.S.- Jaraigarh, Dist.-Khunti … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Archana Kumari, aged about 28 years, wife of Amar Ram, d/o late Raju Mirdha, resident of Gonda, P.O. & P.S.- Gonda, Dist.-Ranchi … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramawatar Choubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 27.02.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 4309 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under sections 498A/ 323/504 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner treated the complainant-opposite party no.2 with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that because of marital discord, this false case has been foisted. It is next submitted that the petitioner is still ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the complainant-opposite party no.2 and will keep and maintain the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife, if and when the complainant-opposite party no.2 is ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes he will not annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.25,000/- and 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. 1st Class- XXI, Ranchi, in connection with Complaint Case No. 4309 of 2022 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case with further condition that the petitioner will keep and maintain the opposite party no.2 with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife if and when the opposite party no.2 is ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the petitioner and will not annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-