Sachida Nand Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4278 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sachida Nand Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 June, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                                       2025:JHHC:16876
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                    A.B.A. No. 3399 of 2025
                                          -----
         Sachida Nand Sharma, S/o Ramawatar Sharma, R/o Village Jamtara, P.O. & P.S.
         Dumri, District Giridih (Jharkhand)
                                                                   .... Petitioner(s).
                                                  Versus
         1.The State of Jharkhand
         2.Jyoti Kumari Pandey, W/o Sachida Nand Sharma and D/o Diwakar Pandey, R/o
         Village Jamtara, Professor Colony, P.O and P.S. Dumri, District Giridih
         (Jharkhand), at present residing at Village Jainagar, Swarnkar Mohalla, Near
         Durga Mandap, P.O. and P.S. Jainagar, District Koderma (Jharkahnd)
                                                                        ... Opp. Party(s)
                                          ------
                CORAM        :      SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

         For the Petitioner(s)      : Mr. Sahil, Advocate
         For the State              : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, AddI. P.P.
                                          .........

02/ 25.06.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

2. This is an application filed by the petitioner praying for grant of anticipatory bail under Sections 482 and 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 apprehending his arrest for the offences under Sections 498A/34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in connection with Complaint Case No.649 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma.

3. The case arises out of a complaint. The cognizance has been taken, thereafter the petitioner has filed this application for anticipatory bail. When cognizance has been taken that too, on complaint there is no question of investigation, far or less custodial investigation. The petitioner has to only appear before the Court, answering the summons.

4. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

5. Thus, I direct the petitioner to appear before the concerned Court answering the summons and the Court will pass an appropriate order in terms of judgment in the case of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.

(ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S./