Balbir Prasad Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4958 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Balbir Prasad Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 April, 2025

Author: Sanjay Prasad

Bench: Sanjay Prasad

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                Cr. Rev. No.732 of 2024
                         ....

1. Balbir Prasad Yadav, aged about 41 years, son of Banwari Prasad Yadav

2. Banwari Prasad Yadav, aged about 65 years, son of Amrit Prasad Yadav Both residents of Sainik Colony, Khelgaon, P.O. Buti, P.S.- Khelgaon, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) ......Petitioners Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Sunita Kumar wife of Balbir Prasad Yadav, resident of Sayal D Koilari, P.O. and P.S.-Bhurkunda, District Ramgarh (Jharkhand) ......Opp. Parties

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

-----

For the Petitioner       : Mr. Sahil, Advocate
For the State            : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, A.P.P
For the O.P. No.2        : Mr. Brij N. Sinha, Advocate
                           Mr. Amitabh, Advocate
                         ......
Order No.05/17.04.2025

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners by challenging the judgment dated 07.06.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.159 of 2024 by Sri Diwakar Pandey, learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi by which the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed and thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order or sentence dated 30.04.2024 passed by Sri Ashok Kumar-IV, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in connection with G.R. Case No.3778 of 2014 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No.252 of 2014 (Petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav now in custody ) along with (Petitioner No.2 Banwari Prasad Yadav earlier released on bail) the petitioners

were convicted for the offence under Section 498-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I for three (03) years and pay the fine of Rs.2,000/-.

3. I.A. No.13693 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav for grant of bail during pendency of this Criminal Revision.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 submitted that the impugned judgments and order of sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. However, learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 submitted that the petitioner is ready to settle the dispute with O.P. No.2 in all the cases which includes present appeal as well as maintenance case, and ready to pay Rs.12,00,000/- (Rs.Twelve Lakhs) to the O.P. No.2 by way of one-time settlement for entering into to compromise in both the cases. It is submitted that the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav will pay Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs) at the time of furnishing of bail bonds and he will also pay the remaining balance Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs.Ten Lakhs) in three equal monthly installments within four weeks after being released from jail. It is submitted that the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is in custody since 09.08.2024 i.e. for more than eight (08) months earlier he was also in custody around two (02) months i.e the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav remained in custody for more than ten (10) months and hence he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Mr. Sahil, learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 submitted that the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is ready to pay Rs.12,00,000/- (Rs. Twelve Lakhs) to the O.P. No.2 by way of one-time settlement also in this case as well as maintenance case and the first installment of Rs.2,00,000/- will be deposited at the

time of furnishing of bail bonds and he will pay the remaining balance in three equal installments in four months after being released from the Jail if the O.P. No.2 is ready to accept remaining Rs.10 lakhs.

6. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 prays for time and submitted that the matter may fixed on the next week.

8. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is not entitled for bail as he has tortured the O.P. No.2. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav has not paid any amount to the O.P. No.2 from May 2024 till date. It is submitted that there is huge amount of arrears of maintenance amount against the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav and the O.P. No.2 has got one child also. It is submitted that apart from the Informant, several prosecution witnesses have supported the allegation of demand of dowry upon the Informant and hence the prayer for bail of the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav may be rejected.

9. Perused the Lower Court Records and considered the submission of the both the sides.

10. It has been informed during the course of submission by the learned counsels for both the sides that earlier also the petitioner no.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav had offered for compromise for a sum of amount i.e. Rs.5 lakh to Rs.6 lakhs whereas the O.P. No.2 had offered the compromise for term of receiving Rs.15 lakhs and O.P. No.2 has got one girl child also.

However, today learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 has specifically submitted that he is ready for one time settlement in

this case as well as maintenance case on payment of sum of total amount Rs.12 lakhs.

11. It appears that earlier the prayer for bail of Petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav has been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Ratnaker Bhengra) of this Court in order dated 03.10.2024 in Criminal Revision No.732 of 2024, although the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Ratnaker Bhengra) of this Court had granted bail to the petitioner No.2 Banwari Prasad Yadav vide the same order dated 03.10.2024.

12. It appears that the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is willing to settle the dispute with O.P. No.2 and ready to pay the amount to the O.P. No.2 by way of one-time settlement in this case as well as in the maintenance case and for which Criminal Revision No.1445 of 2018 has been filed.

13. It appears that the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is in custody after dismissal of appeal and has surrendered on 09.08.2024 and he is custody till date i.e. for more than 8 months. It also appears from the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner no.1 that the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav has remained in custody for more than two months during Trial.

14. Thus, the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav appears to be in custody for more than ten (10)months.

15. Considering the custody of the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav and on the facts and in the circumstance of this case and his willingness to get compromise the case with O.P. No.2 on payment of Rs.12,00,000/-, the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav is directed to be released on Provisional Bail for the period of six months, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousands) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the

satisfaction of Sri Ashok Kumar-IV, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi or his Successor Court in connection with G.R. Case No.3778 of 2014 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No.252 of 2014 subject to the condition that the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav will pay Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs) by way of demand draft / or cash in the name of O.P. No.2 at the time of furnishing the bail bonds and the petitioner No.1 Balbir Prasad Yadav will pay remaining balance Rs.10,00,000/- in three monthly equal installments in four months to the O.P. No.2 as per undertaking given before this Court or in alternative the petitioner will be at liberty to deposit the entire amount before the period in as per his convenience, if the O.P. No.2 is willing to enter into the compromise after taking balance amount of Rs.10 lakhs.

16. Thus, I.A. No.13693 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.

17. Let this Criminal Revision be listed with Criminal Revision No.1445 of 2018.

18. On the request of the learned counsel for both the sides, put up this case on 30th April 2025 on that day it will be desirable that the parties may file a Joint Compromise Petition.

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-