Md. Hafiz Vs The State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court 24 Sep 2012 A.B.A. No. 2841 of 2012 (2012) 09 JH CK 0126
Bench: Single Bench
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

A.B.A. No. 2841 of 2012

Hon'ble Bench

Jaya Roy, J

Advocates

Nitin Kumar Pasari, for the Appellant;

Acts Referred
  • Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 438(2)
  • Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Section 3, 4
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 34, 498(A), 504, 506

Judgement Text

Translate:

Hon''ble Mrs. Justice Jaya Roy

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 498(A), 504, 506/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the informant.

3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the fact that the petitioner is the brother-in-law (nandoi) of the informant and he is residing separately, the petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender in the court below within a period of one month from the date of this order i.e. 24.09.2012. If he surrenders within the said period, the trial Court is directed to release him on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No. 157 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 1202 of 2012, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be local resident having immovable property within the jurisdiction of the District concern and also subject to the conditions laid down u/s 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

From The Blog
CBSE Suspends Gurugram School’s Affiliation; Spotlight on Rules That Protect Students Nationwide
Jan
01
2026

Court News

CBSE Suspends Gurugram School’s Affiliation; Spotlight on Rules That Protect Students Nationwide
Read More
Delhi High Court Rules: Voice Samples for Call Matching Do Not Violate Fundamental Rights
Jan
01
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Rules: Voice Samples for Call Matching Do Not Violate Fundamental Rights
Read More