Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8642 (JHR)

MD. MANSUR v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./38/2026 · 2026-01-12

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:672 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.38 of 2026 1. Md. Mansur, aged about 48 years, son of Late Ajim Miyan, 2. Mazda Khatoon, aged about 45 years wife of Md. Mansur, 3. Md. Suhel @ Sohal Alam, aged about 19 years, son of Md. Mansur All resident of village & Post Rasoiya Dhamna, P.S. Barhi, District Haziarbagh. …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Ms. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P. ------ 2/12.01.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Barhi P.S. Case No.248 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 85, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 is father-in-law, petitioner No.2 is mother-in-law and petitioner No.3 is brother-in-law of informant’s daughter. She next submits that there are general and omnibus allegations of torture and demand of dowry are made and the entire family members have been made accused. She also submits that victim has not lodged the FIR and the victim has filed affidavit before the learned Sessions Judge in anticipatory bail application saying that without her consent, her father has lodged the FIR. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and 2026:JHHC:672 2 submits that the allegations are there of torture and demand of dowry. 5. Considering that petitioner No.1 is father-in-law, petitioner No.2 is mother-in-law and petitioner No.3 is brother-in-law of informant’s daughter and the victim has filed affidavit before the learned Sessions Judge saying that without her consent, her father has lodged the FIR. In that view of the matter, the petitioners above named are directed to surrender before the learned Court and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and conditions and sureties, learned Court deem fit and proper. 6. This Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 12.01.2026 R.Kumar