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.

ORDER :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 04.05.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2020 by Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj by which the Criminal Appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.02.2020 passed by Sri Binay Kumar Lal, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj in connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 25 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. -180 of 2016 (T.R. No. 1113 of 2020) by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under section 498 (A) of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two 02) years and to pay the fine of Rs. 10,000/-.

2. I. A. No. 4484 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and perused the records of this case.

4. It is submitted that the impugned judgments and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the allegation of demand dowry and torture against the petitioner are false and concocted. It is submitted that the petitioner is husband of the O.P. No. 2 and he is in custody since 03.04.2024. It is submitted that O.P. No. 2 has not appeared till date and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State, has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner had tortured the O.P. No. 2 and assaulted her for due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry and hence prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected.

6. Perused the Records of this case and considered the submissions of the both sides.

7. It appears that despite sending notice to O.P. No. 2 vide order dated 20.08.2024 and 11.09.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra as then Lordship was) and order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar), the O.P. No. 2 has not appeared as yet.

8. It also reveals that notice has not been served upon the O.P. No.2. and undelivered notice have been received with the endorsement that the O.P. No. 2 does not reside at mentioned address.

9. It appears that the learned Court below has acquitted the father-in-law, mother-in-law and other in-law members of the O.P. No. 2.

10. It appears that the petitioner –husband is in custody since 03.04.2024 i.e. for more than nine (09) months.

11. Considering the custody of the petitioner and on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner namely Ajoy Kumar Ojha @ Ajay Kumar Ojha is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Mr. Binay Kumar Lal, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj or his Successor Court in connection with in connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 25 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 180 of 2016 ( T.R. No. 1113 of 2020).

12. Thus, I.A. No. 4484 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.

Cr. Rev. No. 950 of 2023

13. Issue fresh notice upon the O.P. No. 2 by both the process registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process on their correct address and present address, for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks from today and returned copy may be utilized.

14. Call for the scanned copies of the Lower Court Record from the learned Court below.

15. Office is directed to place proper note in future in regard of service of notice upon the party concerned

16. Put up this case on 06.03.2025.