Kunal Choudhary vs State of Jharkhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 1313

BELA M. TRIVEDI, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Kunal Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Kumar Shivam, Mr. Mayank Sapre, Mr. Vatsalya Vigya
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Ms. Madhusmita Bora, Mr. Pawan Kishore Singh, Mr. Dipankar Singh, Mr. Anupama Sharma, Mr. Subhro Sanyal, Mr. Sagar Roy, Mr. Bikash Chandra, Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Mr. Shekhar Kaushik, Mr. Nitya Nanda Mahato, Mr. Amber Shahabaz Ansari, Ms. Deepmala Deepmala, Ms. Sushma, Mr. Ashraf Mansoori, Mr. K.K. Chauhan, Mr. Sandeep Lamba

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant is assailing the order dated 17.06.2022 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand in Cr.M.P. No.2419 of 2021 filed by the appellant under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying for modification of the order dated 10.08.2021 passed in A.B.A. No.2025 of 2021. Vide the said order dated 10.08.2021, the High Court had allowed the A.B.A. No.2025 of 2021 on the condition that the appellant shall take the respondent No.2 (wife) to his house at Pandra locality of Ranchi and maintain her with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. This Court by the order dated 01.05.2023 had granted the stay against the arrest of the appellant in reference to the Complaint Case No.3004 of 2018 dated 16.07.2018.

5. The High Court vide the impugned order has dismissed the Cr.M.P. No.2419 of 2021 filed by the appellant observing that in view of the adamant attitude of the appellant in not resuming the conjugal life with the opposite party No.2 in the house of the appellant, where the opposite party No.2 was staying, his petition could not be considered. In our opinion, neither such condition should have been imposed by the High Court whil

Click Here to Read the rest of this document