Mumtaj Alam @ Md. Mumtaj Alam vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4492 Jhar

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                   Criminal Revision No. 924 of 2020
                                            ....

                Mumtaj Alam @ Md. Mumtaj Alam                                     ....       Petitioner
                                          Versus
                The State of Jharkhand                                            ....   Opposite Party
                                          ....
                CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

                For the Petitioner              : Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, Adv.
                For the State                   : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P.
                                                ....
09/30.11.2021              Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to add the victim (wife) Amreen

Naz as opposite party no.2 during course of the day.

Issue notice to the newly added O.P. No.2, under registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process, for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks.

I.A. No.6206 of 2021 The instant application has been filed against the judgment dated 17.10.2020 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2020 who has affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.06.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in Jharia P.S. Case No.295 of 2015, G.R. Case No.4365 of 2015 (T.R. No.242 of 2020), whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 498A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 18 months with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further sentenced to undergo S.I. for three months.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the conviction under Section 498A of the IPC itself is bad as because the petitioner has acquitted from the charge of Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The attention of this Court has been drawn to the different paragraphs of the trial court judgment, whereby the trial court has discussed and found the charge. Explanation 'a' of Section 498A has not been proved and further it has been found proved under explanation 'b'. The clause 'b' gets negated, since the petitioner has been acquitted from the charge under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

In view of above facts, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the petitioner on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in Jharia P.S. Case No.295 of 2015, G.R. Case No.4365 of 2015 (T.R. No.242 of 2020) subject to the condition that the petitioner will submit self attested copy of his Aadhar Card and also give his mobile number before the learned court below, which he will not change during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

I.A. No. 6206 of 2021 stand disposed off.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Shahid/