Manikant Gupta @ Jannu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 2363 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                A.B.A. No.8580 of 2022
                            ------

Manikant Gupta @ Jannu .... .... .... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Puja Kumari .... .... ....Opposite Parties

------

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, Addl.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Dubey, Adv.

------

Order No.08 Dated- 19.07.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Kadma P.S. Case No. 113 of 2021 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 498-A, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

It is alleged that the marriage of complainant was solemnized with present petitioner in the year 2018. After marriage, petitioner along with other family members started demanding Rs.15 lakhs cash as additional dowry for the purpose of development of business. Due to non-fulfillment of which, the complainant was subjected to mental and physical torture and eventually, she was ousted from the matrimonial home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is matrimonial discord between the parties and all the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and fabricated. Petitioner is still ready and willing to keep the complainant with full honour and dignity as his lawful wife. Petitioner has complied the notice under Section 41(A) of Cr.PC and he is co-operating with the investigation of the case and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner, hence, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation for further investigation. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

It appears that petitioner has co-operated with the investigation of the case in compliance of notice under Section 41(A) of Cr.PC and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner and the case falls under category "A" of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in 2021(10) SCC 773. There is no requirement for custodial trial of the petitioner. Hence, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this anticipatory bail application is disposed off.

Petitioner is directed to appear before the court below and seek regular bail which shall be disposed off in strict compliance of guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in 2021(10) SCC 773 as well as recent observation of Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in 2023 LiveLaw(SC) 233.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Pappu/