Afroz Ansari @ Md. Afroz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 242 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Afroz Ansari @ Md. Afroz Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 May, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                            2025:JHHC:13817


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           A.B.A. No.3262 of 2024
                                     ------
     Afroz Ansari @ Md. Afroz Ansari, son of Hazrat Ali, R/o Village
     Dhipatoli (Pundag), P.O. Pundag, P.S. Jagarnathpur (Pundag TOP),
     District Ranchi.                                   ... ... Petitioner
                                    Versus
     1.    The State of Jharkhand.
     2.    Nazish Saba, W/o Afroz Ansari @ Md. Afroz Ansari.
                                                  ... ... Opposite Party
                                     ------
                      CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Dr. Hasnain Waris, Advocate Ms. Reshma Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Kumar Verma, A.P.P.

-----

11/ 07.05.2025

This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 and

440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been preferred

by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Gumla

Mahila P.S. Case No.4 of 2024, for offences under Sections 341,

323, 417, 498-A, 504, 34 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act. The case is presently pending before the Court of

learned CJM, Gumla.

2. Learned A.P.P. representing the State and learned

counsel representing the informant oppose the anticipatory bail

application.

3. This is a case in one of the offences under Sections

498A IPC, where it is alleged that the petitioner along with his

family members has tortured his wife and demanded dowry.

4. During the course of argument, learned counsel

representing the petitioner takes this Court towards para-10 to 13

of the Counter Affidavit filed by the opposite party - State. In the

said paragraphs, it has been specifically stated that notice under

2025:JHHC:13817

Section 41A Cr.P.C. was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner

and co-accused persons have produced their respective affidavits

in their defence also.

5. When notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. has been issued,

natural presumption is that the police does not want to take the

petitioner in custody. That being so, there is no imminent threat of

the petitioner being arrested.

6. In this case, since there is no imminent threat of arrest,

this Anticipatory Bail Application is premature. Further, notice

under Section 41A Cr.P.C. has been issued and the petitioner has

cooperated with the same, it can be said that there is no

apprehension of arrest of the petitioner.

7. With the aforesaid observation, this Anticipatory Bail

Application stands disposed of. However, liberty is granted to the

petitioner to appear before the Court concerned, who will pass

appropriate order in terms of the judgments of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court on this issue.

(ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3