Jharkhand High Court
Sayed Mohammad Tanveer vs The State Of Jharkhand on 26 October, 2015
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 2867 of 2015
Syed Mohammad Tanveer... ... ... ... ... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... ... ... Opp. Party.
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Sr. Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P.
------
02/ 26.10.2015: Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Sr. counsel for petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumr Tiwari, learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Lalpur P.S. Case No. 252 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 5117 of 2014, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 417, 323, 504, 506 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution story as would arise from the first information report is that the informant is a lady constable and working in Daily Market Police Station. It is alleged that the petitioner on the pretext of marriage had established physical relationship with her. It has further been alleged that subsequently wife of the petitioner and other persons had came to her house and started assaulting the petitioner and threatened her with dire consequences.
Although the case was instituted under sections 376, 417, 323,504, 506 and 385 of the Indian penal Code, but the charge sheet was submitted under sections 417, 323, 504, 506 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, the cognizance was taken under sections 376, 417,323, 504, 506 and 385 of the Indian penal code. Hence, the petitioner having apprehension of being arrested has preferred this anticipatory bail application.
It has been submitted by the learned sr. counsel for the petitioner that earlier the petitioner was on police bail and only because of the fact that the cognizance has been taken under various sections including under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, although charge sheet was not submitted under the said section, the petitioner having apprehension of being arrested has preferred the present anticipatory bail application. Learned Sr. counsel has referred to a decision rendered in the case of Dinesh Kumar Versus The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2011(3) East Cr. C. 430 (Jhr), wherein it has been held as follows:
" I have gone through the documents placed before me. Since the petitioner had appeared before the police and he was on police bail and even after submission of charge sheet only notice has been issued for securing his appearance, I do not feel that present anticipatory bail application is maintainable. If the petitioner was previously on bail, only because cognizance has been taken for the offence which are non-bailable, bail should not be refused. If he appears before the Court after receiving notice or summon. At this juncture, I also intend to mention another aspect in which the accused persons are released on bail under section 436 Cr.P.C. In a case registered for bailable offence and subsequently if charge sheet is submitted against them for non-bailable offences and on being summoned, if they appear before the court, bail should not be refused or cancelled only because cognizance has been taken under non-bailable sections."
In such circumstance it has been prayed that the petitioner be directed to be released on bail.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and has submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of establishing physical relationship with the informant on the pretext of marriage.
It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was already on police bail prior to taking of cognizance under section 376 of the Indian penal Code. In such, circumstance and in view of the judgment referred to above as well as the order passed in A.B.A. No. 3041 of 2012, this anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.
However, taking a cue from the judgment referred to above, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular bail within a period of three weeks from today and if he does so he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri C.B. Kumar, the learned J.M. First Class, Ranchi, , in connection with Lalpur P.S. Case No. 252 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 5117 of 2014.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Sharma/-