Daily Archives: August 14, 2013

PATNA HC : husband ready to keep wife with full diginity, WIFE REFUSES, still husband given AB

PATNA HC : husband ready to keep wife with full dignity, wife refuses, husband given AB

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15187 of 2013

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

Rishikesh Pal son of Sri Basudeo Mandal **** **** Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar **** **** Opposite Party/s

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

ORAL ORDER

06-08-2013

Petitioner being husband of the informant is languishing in custody since 19.02.2013 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 313, 323, 354, 379, 498A, 504, 506, 120B of the I.P.C. and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The basic accusation is of torture and getting the pregnancy terminated.

On 02.05.2013 the notices were issued to the informant when petitioner was granted provisional bail.

Thereafter attempt was made to reconcile the issue between the parties which gets reflected from the orders dated 09.05.2013 and 14.05.2013.

On 25.06.2013 the stand of the petitioner was recorded that he is ready to keep the informant as wife with full dignity and honour when the offer was refused by the informant since she was apprehensive due to the past conduct of the petitioner. Similar is the stand of the petitioner and the informant even today. In the circumstance, chances of reconciliation at present is not feasible. Petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 2000/- to the informant from September, 2013, by depositing the same in the bank account of the informant by second week of every month. The aforesaid offer is acceptable to the informant who undertakes to supply the bank account number within a period of two weeks by filing the same on affidavit before learned Court below.

Considering the aforesaid stand of the parties, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 02.05.2013 is hereby confirmed in connection with Mahila(Sadar) P.S. Case No. 48 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea. The aforesaid payments will be subject to any order being passed in matrimonial or maintenance proceeding. Three consecutive defaults in payment will give liberty to the informant to file appropriate application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Shageer/-

*****************************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 Foundation. SIF 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 INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

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

FOLLOW
@ATMwithDick on twitter or
https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases )
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

20 yr old girl runs away with mum’s 20 KG gold & pakistani loverboy !! luckily NO husband to arrest !!

Generally Indian husbands are arrested, their mother’s arrested IF any young girl goes missing

in this romeo Juliet story, luckily there was NO husband and the girl was running away with her pakistani loverboy !!!

read more from the news item below

‘Romeo and Juliet’ bid to elope with Dh3m gold fails

Afkar Abdullah / 13 August 2013

It’s almost Romeo and Juliet — star-crossed Sharjah lovers whose bold plan to elope ended in failure.

An Indian women in her twenties was arrested at an airport while trying to escape the country, after stealing Dh3 million worth of gold from her mother — and giving it to her Pakistani lover, who was to figure out a plan to smuggle the gold out, meet up with his girlfriend and get married.

However, police acted swiftly after the confused mother approached them claiming a stranger had kidnapped her daughter while she waited in a taxi that dropped her outside the Customs building located at the Sharjah Airport Free Zone.

“I left my daughter in the cab waiting for me while heading to the Customs building to finalise all documents for the gold that I wanted to transport to India while travelling,” the mother said.

She said she was shocked when she discovered her daughter, the cab and the gold all gone — along with her daughter’s mobile phone switched off, which led to the confusion.

“As soon as the mother reported the matter, a team from the CID immediately launched a probe and information received by the police was totally different from the mother’s kidnap and robbery report as the daughter was arrested at one of the UAE airport’s departure exits a few hours later,” a CID officer said.

During interrogation, the daughter confessed that she, along with her Pakistani lover, had made a plan to steal her mother’s jewellery.

“Her boyfriend finalised all her travelling documents and dropped her to the airport to catch her flight and was planning to travel after her, once he found a way of smuggling the jewellery belonging to her mum, while promising to marry her after selling her mother’s jewellery.”

The officer said after attaining information from the girl about the whereabouts of her boyfriend, he was arrested. He confessed to robbing and keeping the gold with him.

The two suspects are currently detained and will be referred to the Public Prosecution.

afkarali

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/nation/inside.asp?xfile=/data/crime/2013/August/crime_August41.xml&section=crime

************** end of news item ************

FOLLOW
@ATMwithDick on twitter or
https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases )
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

Patna HC NOT willing to quash even IF wife is allegd NOT legally wedded. Says facts to be verified by trial court ! One more example showing why quash is tough in some jurisdictions

Patna HC NOT willing to quash even IF wife is NOT legally wedded etc. Says facts to be verified by trial court ! One more example showing why quash is tough in some jurisdictions

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7228 of 2013

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

Dipak Kumar, S/O Rameshwar Singh, Resident Of Village- Bajruhan, Police Station- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur **** **** Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Shyamlata @ Dimpy, D/O Rameshwar Singh alias Yogendra Singh R/O Kothia, P.S. Didarganj, District- Patna City. **** **** Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the O. P. No.2 : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar No.III, A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

07-08-2013

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no.2.

case collected from public websites and updated to http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ and / or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ and / or http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com/

This application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report of Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.592 of 2012, G.R. No.2148 of 2012 registered under Sections 323, 504 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that informant is not the legally wedded wife.

At this stage this Court is not inclined to interfere with quashing of the First Information Report. So far the factum of marriage is concerned, it can only be tested at the stage of trial. The petitioner will be at liberty to raise all points before the court below at the appropriate stage.

Accordingly this application is dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

Vinay/-

*****************************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 Foundation. SIF 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 INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

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

FOLLOW
@ATMwithDick on twitter or
https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases )
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

Patna HC Antc bail after compromise & moolah 2.5 lakhs agreed. wife NOT turn up aftr notice. Still HC grants AB

Patna HC Antc bail after compromise & moolah 2.5 lakhs agreed. wife NOT turn up aftr notice. Still HC grants AB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30975 of 2011

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

1. Dinkar Sharma S/O Late Bipin Bihari Sharma Village- Subneema, P.S- Athmalgola, District- Patna **** Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Pinki Sharma, w/o Dinkar Sharma, resident of R.M.S. Colony, Road No. 3, P.S. Kankerbagh, Patna **** Opposite Parties

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

02-01-2013

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This is a petition for grant of anticipatory bail for offence under Sections 498A of the Penal Code and 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier a compromise has taken place for full and final settlement on Rs.2,50,000/- and even notice issued to the complainant she did not appear.

case collected from public websites and updated to http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ and / or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ and / or http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com/

Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bound of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Complaint Case No. 717C of 2008 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, subject to the condition that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, who will file affidavit to the effect that the petitioner will pay maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month to the complainant till final settlement.

(Gopal Prasad, J)

SA/-

*****************************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 Foundation. SIF 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 INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

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

FOLLOW
@ATMwithDick on twitter or
https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases )
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

ANTICIPATORY Bail to parents EVEN when wife is dead. Jharkhand HC. Marriage 13 years ago.

ANTICIPATORY Bail to parents EVEN when wife is dead. Jharkhand HC. Marriage 13 years ago.

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A.No. 3475 of 2012

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

1. Snichar Sao @ Bhawani Sao
2. Shanti Devi ****** Petitioners

Versus

Versus

The State of Jharkhand ****** Opposite Party

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

Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar.

For the Petitioner : M/S Rashmi Kumari

For the State : Sri Sudhanshu Sheikhar Choudhary, A.P.P

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

02.01.2013.

Anticipatory bail application filed by Snichar Sao @ Bhawani Sao and Shanti Devi is moved by M/S Rashmi Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri Sudhanshu Sheikhar Choudhary, Addl P.P. for the State. It has come in the Case Diary that the marriage of deceased with the son of petitioners took place 13 years ago. Police, after investigation, submitted Charge Sheet Under Sections 498A and 306 of the I.P.C. There is no direct evidence in the Case Diary to show that these petitioners abated deceased for committing suicide. It is also an admitted position that Viscera report has not been received and the Doctor has not given any opinion regarding the cause of death.

case collected from public websites and updated to http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ and / or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ and / or http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com/

Considering the aforesaid fact and circumstance, I allow this application and direct the petitioners, named above, to surrender in the court below by 16th January,2013. If petitioners surrender by that time, the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioners, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) -Cum- C.J.M., Koderma in connection with Koderma P.S. case no. 182 of 2012, corresponding to G.R.No.460 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.

( Prashant Kumar, J.)

Raman/

*****************************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 Foundation. SIF 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 INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

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

FOLLOW
@ATMwithDick on twitter or
https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases )
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