Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9430 (JHR)

SONAM KUMARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./3117/2021 · 2026-01-15

Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:998 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 3117 of 2021 Sonam Kumari, D/o Narendra Lohra, resident of Kushum Bihar, Road No.9, Morabadi, PO and PS Bariyatu, District: Ranchi. ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand; 2. Amit Munda, son of Chandra Mohan Munda, resident of near Nehru Club, Sarubera Colony, PO and PS: Kuju, District: Ramgarh. … Opposite Parties --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY For the Petitioner : None For the State : Spl.P.P. --- 05/15.01.2026 None appears on behalf of the petitioner though the learned Spl.P.P. is present. This application has been preferred by the petitioner for cancellation of bail granted to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 23.11.2020 passed in ABA No. 2821 of 2020. What could be gathered from the averments made in the instant application is that both the petitioner and the opposite party no.2 had filed an application for their marriage before the Marriage Officer, Ranchi under the Special Marriage Act,1954 but after being granted anticipatory bail by this Court, the opposite party no.2 had not taken any further steps and in fact, the opposite party no.2 has also threatened the petitioner and her parents. It seems that the opposite party no.2 was granted anticipatory bail on 23.11.2020 in ABA No. 2821 of 2020 primarily on the ground that the petitioner appears to be a major and had willingly acceded to the sexual overtures of the opposite party no.2. So far as the application made by the opposite party no.2 before the Marriage Registrar, Ranchi is concerned, the same has been mentioned in the said order and as regards the claim of the petitioner that the opposite party no.2 had threatened the petitioner and her parents, nothing substantive in support thereof has been brought on record, save and except, an application preferred under section 39 Cr.P.C. before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. On such consideration, therefore, I am not inclined to accede to the prayer made by the petitioner for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party no.2 in ABA No. 2821 of 2020. Consequently, this application stands dismissed. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.) 15.01.2026 S.B. Uploaded on 16.01.2026 -2-