Jharkhand High Court
Ajoy Kumar Ojha @ Ajay Kumar Ojha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 January, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 950 of 2023
Ajoy Kumar Ojha @ Ajay Kumar Ojha ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rupa Pandey ...... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Swami Nath Prasad Rai, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, A.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : None
.....
Order No. 12/ Dated:21.01.2025
This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on
behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 04.05.2023
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2020 by Manoj Kumar Singh ,
learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj by which the Criminal Appeal
preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed affirming the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.02.2020 passed by Sri
Binay Kumar Lal, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , Sahibganj in
connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 25 of 2016,
corresponding to G.R. No. -180 of 2016 ( T.R. No. 1113 of 2020) by
which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under section
498 (A) of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two 02) years
and to pay the fine of Rs. 10,000/- .
2. I. A. No. 4484 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State and perused the records of this case.
4. It is submitted that the impugned judgments and order
passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and not sustainable in
eye of law. It is submitted that the allegation of demand dowry and
torture against the petitioner are false and concocted. It is submitted
that the petitioner is husband of the O.P. No. 2 and he is in custody
since 03.04.2024. It is submitted that O.P. No. 2 has not appeared till
date and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State,
has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner had
tortured the O.P. No. 2 and assaulted her for due to non- fulfilment of
demand of dowry and hence prayer for bail of the petitioner may be
rejected.
6. Perused the Records of this case and considered the submissions
of the both sides.
7. It appears that despite sending notice to O.P. No. 2 vide order
dated 20.08.2024 and 11.09.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court ( Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra as then Lordship was) and
order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) , the O.P. No. 2 has not
appeared as yet.
8. It also reveals that notice has not been served upon the O.P.
No.2.and undelivered notice have been received with the
endorsement that the O.P. No. 2 does not reside at mentioned address.
9. It appears that the learned Court below has acquitted the
father -in -law, mother -in law and other in-law members of the O.P.
No. 2.
10. It appears that the petitioner -husband is in custody since
03.04.2024 i.e. for more than nine (09) months .
11. Considering the custody of the petitioner and on the facts and
in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner namely Ajoy Kumar
Ojha @ Ajay Kumar Ojha is directed to be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Mr. Binay Kumar Lal,
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , Sahibganj or his Successor Court in
connection with in connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 25 of
2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 180 of 2016 ( T.R. No. 1113 of 2020).
12. Thus, I.A. No. 4484 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.
13. Issue fresh notice upon the O.P. No. 2 by both the process
registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process on their
correct address and present address, for which requisites etc. must
be filed within two weeks from today and returned copy may be
utilized.
14. Call for the scanned copies of the Lower Court Record from
the learned Court below.
15. Office is directed to place proper note in future in regard of
service of notice upon the party concerned
16. Put up this case on 06.03.2025.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Bibha/
