Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD, J
Nikesh Kumar Jha, Son Of Bhogendra Jha – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
I.A. No. 157 of 2025
The present Criminal Revision No. 443 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 29.02.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 105 of 2023 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner -XXI, Ranchi whereby learned Additional Judicial Commissioner -XXI, Ranchi has dismissed the Criminal Appeal No. 105 of 2023 and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.05.2023 passed by Ms. Dhriti Dhairya, Judicial Magistrate, First Class IV, Ranchi in connection with Dhurwa P. S. Case No. 123 of 2019 corresponding to G. R. No. 58 of 2020 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Sections 498 (A) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of one (1) year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of three (3) months for the offence under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of six (6) months and to pay the fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the o
The court emphasizes the importance of mediation in matrimonial disputes and grants provisional bail based on the parties' willingness to settle.
Mediation is encouraged in matrimonial disputes, with courts considering custody time and readiness to settle when evaluating bail applications.
Matrimonial disputes invoking IPC Sections 498(A) and 494 require careful consideration of evidence and circumstances for bail applications.
The court granted bail to the petitioner considering the lengthy custody and absence of the complainant, emphasizing the need for the complainant's presence in court.
The court granted bail in a matrimonial dispute case after considering the total custody period, despite a concurrent finding of guilt under Section 498-A.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, emphasizing the necessity of compensation and the legal obligation of cheque issuance.
The court emphasized the significance of custody duration in bail considerations, allowing the petitioner bail after eight months of incarceration.
Court considerations for bail include the duration of custody and the gravity of allegations, emphasizing that prolonged detention can warrant bail even in serious cases.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
