Jharkhand High CourtSmt. Raj Kumari Devi & Anr vs State Of Jharkhand on 24 February, 2012Author:Jaya RoyBench:Jaya RoyIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                              -----
                                  A.B.A.NO. 428 of 2012
                                                ----
                   1. Smt. Raj Kumari Devi
                   2. Sarju Kumar Singh @ Sonu                       ....      Petitioners.
                                              --Versus--
                    State of Jharkhand                                  ..... Opp.Party.
                                                     ------
                    CORAM :          HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
                                                  ------
                   For the Petitioner      : M/s. Sunil Kumar, Advocate.
                   For the State           : A.P.P.
                                             ------
02/24.02.2012Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for
          the State.The petitioners are accused in a case registered
          underSections 406/504/506/34I.P.C. and ¾ of theDowry Prohibition
          Act.Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
          allegation against the petitioners along with other persons is that
          they have settled the marriage of the son of petitioner no.1 with the
          daughter of the complainant and they have taken a huge amount on
          the date of 'Cheka'. But, thereafter, they started demanding a huge
          amount i.e. Rs.10 lacs(ten lacs). As the informant did not agree to
          give such a huge amount they neither settled the marriage with the
          son of the petitioner no.1 with the daughter of the complainant nor
          they have returned the money which they have taken on the date of
          'Cheka'. It is further contended that petitioner no.1 is the mother of
          the boy whose marriage was going to be settled with the daughter
          of the complainant and petitioner no.2 is the younger son of
          petitioner no.1. It is also contended that there is no specific
          allegation against both the petitioners. It is further contended that
          the informant has submitted that the petitioners and other accused
          persons have cheated a huge amount but there is no chit of paper to
          prove their contention.Considering the facts and circumstances of the
          case and considering the fact that petitioner no.1 is the mother and
          petitioner o.2 is the brother of the boy whose marriage was going to
          be settled with the daughter of the complainant, according to the
          allegation made in the F.I.R, I direct both the petitioners, namely,
          Smt. Raj Kumari Devi and Sarju Kumar Singh @ Sonu to surrender before
 the court below/ trial court within a period of one month from the
date of this order(24.02.2012). If they surrender within the aforesaid
period, the trial court is directed to release them on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Giridih in connection with Giridih(M) P.S. Case no.336/2007(G.R.
Case NO.2210/2007) subject to the conditions that (i) both the
bailors will be local persons having immovable property within the
jurisdiction of the trial court,(ii) petitioner no.1 will remain physically
present before the trial court/court below at least once in a month
on the date fixed for trial till the conclusion of the trial and subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.(Jaya Roy, J.)


Biswas.