Jharkhand High Court
Chandreshwar Prasad Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 March, 2021
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 438 of 2021
---------
1. Chandreshwar Prasad Sharma
2. Priyanka Sharma ... ... Petitioners Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rinki Sharma ... ... Opposite Parties
---------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
---------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Ms. Nanda Kumari, Advocate
---------
02/04.03.2021 Defect no. 9(i) as pointed out by the office is ignored.
Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by Ms. Nanda Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
The petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Namkum P. S. Case No. 130 of 2020.
The marriage of the informant was solemnized with Prem Kumar Sharma on 21.04.2015. It has been alleged that after a month of marriage there was a demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- made by the accused persons and on non-fulfillment of the said demand she was subjected to torture. It has further been alleged that the petitioner no. 1 had tried to establish physical relationship with the informant. The petitioner no. 2 appears to be the sister-in-law of the informant while the petitioner no. 1 is the husband of the petitioner no. 2.
It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are residing separate and only in order to make the entire family liable for the prosecution the petitioners have been made accused.
Ms. Nanda Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the informant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and has stated that specific allegation has been levelled against both the petitioners and in fact they were the persons who were primarily responsible for disrupting the marital life of the informant.
-2-It appears from the First Information Report that specific allegation has been levelled against the husband of the informant. So far as the petitioners are concerned, it appears that they have been implicated merely on account of being related tot he husband of the informant. It has specifically stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners reside at a separate place and not the place where the incident is alleged to have been taken place.
Regard being had to the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners, named above, are directed to surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and on such surrender, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Namkum P. S. Case No. 130 of 2020 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
This application stands allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Umesh/-