Posted On by &filed under High Court, Jharkhand High Court.


Jharkhand High Court
Krishnadeo Modi vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 23 August, 2011
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             B.A. No.4137 of 2011

          Krishnadeo Modi                                 .....   Petitioner
                                    Versus
          The State of Jharkhand & another                ....      Opposite Parties

          CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA

          For the Petitioner          :       Mr. Deepak Kumar
          For the State               :       A. P.P.
          For the O.P. No.2           :       Mrs. Nivedita Kundu

                                  -----
4/23.8.2011

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the
Prosecution as also the learned counsel for the complainant who has appeared
through Vakalatnama.

Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 498A of
the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Complaint Case No.51 of 2009.

Learned counsel for the both sides submitted that both the parties are
ready to reside together.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the
petitioner on provisional bail for a period of three months subject to the condition
that the petitioner, soon after release, shall bring his wife to his house and shall
keep her with due dignity. Accordingly, the petitioner Krishnadeo Modi is directed
to be released on provisional bail till 21st November, 2011 upon furnishing bail
bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Koderma, in connection
with Complaint Case No.51 of 2009.

List this matter on 16th November, 2011 on which date both the parties shall
inform the court whether cordial relationship has been established between the
parties or not.

In the mean time, if soon after release of the petitioner, complainant-wife is
not brought to the house of the petitioner, and if there is any ill-treatment to the
complainant-wife, the counsel for the complainant shall be at liberty to mention the
case for early listing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has apprehension that
complainant-wife may not accompany the petitioner. In that case, the petitioner
shall file appropriate supplementary affidavit / interlocutory application indicating
the fact, for appropriate orders.

(H. C. Mishra, J)
R.Kumar


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

109 queries in 0.188 seconds.