Monday, July 28, 2014

How SEVEN ppl run for BAIL on ablaa's 498A, 323, 354 complaint, after SC ruling in Arnesh Kumar !!


* The Hon SC has clearly stated how many members of the husband's family are roped into 498a cases to put pressure on them
* in many such cases all of them apprehend arrest and run for bail
* the trial takes many years and more time, money and lives of innocents is wasted
* In the instant case, decided just a few days ago, seven members of a family, excluding the hubby !!, i.e. hubby's brothers, their sons and other relatives apprehend arrest
* Ablaa has filed cases under 498A, 323, 354 etc
* In case some one forgot, The Indian Penal Code. 354 = Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty !!!

* So one can understand the allegations against the husband's brothers
* All these seven seek bail and are thankfully granted provisional bail

************************************************************


Jharkhand High Court

Arjun Mahto And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr on 24 July, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 2406 of 2014

1. Arjun Mahto
2. Awadhesh Mahto
3. Rameshwar Mahto
4. Gautam Kumar
5. Rita Devi
6. Nagendra Kumar
7. Vijay Kumar  ...  Petitioners

Versus

    1. State of Jharkhand
    2. Sulekha Devi      ... Opposite Parties ..........

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

For the Petitioners  :  Mrs. Rashmi Kumari, Advocate
For the State    :  A.P.P.
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
********************************

24.07.2014 

An urgency slip was filed by the counsel for the  applicants and therefore, the matter has been heard today. Let notice to the   Opposite Party No. 2 be issued  under   registered   cover   with   A/D   as   well   as   by   ordinary  process for which requisites etc. must be filed within a period  of two weeks. 

The learned counsel appearing for the applicants  submits that the applicants are apprehending their arrest in  Complaint Case No. 801 of 2013 under Sections  498A, 323,  354 (1)(A)(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants  submits   that   the   applicant   nos.   1   and   2   are   the   elder  brothers­in­law, applicant no. 3 is the son of applicant no. 1,  applicant no. 4 is the son of applicant no. 2, applicant no. 5 is  the sister­in­law and applicant nos. 6 and 7 are Bhagina of  the complainant. 

She further submits that applicant no. 1 to  5 are residing at Patna, Bihar.  http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

Post the matter two weeks after service of notice  upon Opposite Party No. 2.

The applicants would pay a sum of Rs. 1000/­ to  the Opposite Party No. 2 on the next date of hearing. 

Considering   the   facts   and   circumstances,   in   the  event of arrest of the applicants or if they surrender before  the trial court within four weeks from today the applicants  namely,   (1)   Arjun   Mahto,   (2)   Awadhesh   Mahto,  (3) Rameshwar Mahto,   (4) Gautam Kumar,   (5) Rita Devi,  (6) Nagendra Kumar   and     (7) Vijay Kumar   would   be  released on  Provisional Bail  on furnishing bail bond of Rs.  10,000/­ (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like  amount   each   to   the   satisfaction   of   the   learned   S.D.J.M.,  Koderma, in  Complaint Case No. 801 of 2013.

Let a copy of this order be sent through FAX on  depositing the cost by the applicants.  

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

Amit/


*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family movement. SIF as a concept is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
 
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************


*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
  
  
regards
  
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist