Jharkhand High Court
Jakir Khan @ Zakir Kha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 June, 2025
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2025:JHHC:16608
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.7331 of 2024
------
1.Jakir Khan @ Zakir Kha, son of late Akram Khan @ Late
Akram Kha, village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda,
District Deoghar
2.Kasib Khan @ Kasib Kha @ Kasif Kha, son of Md. Jakir Khan
@ Md. Zakir Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS
Margomunda, District Deoghar
3.Basid Khan @ Basid Kha, son of Md. Jakir Khan @ Md. Zakir
Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District
Deoghar
4.Nehada Khatun, D/o Md. Jakir Khan @ Md. Zakir Kha, R/o
village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar
... ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand.
3.Wajda Khatun @ Wajda Parween, D/o Late Takrim Khan @
Late Takrim Kha, W/o Hasib Khan @ Hasib Kha, R/o village
Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar
... ... Opposite Party(s)
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
——
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, A.P.P.
—–
06/ 23.06.2025
Heard the parties.
2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and
484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023,
has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest
for the offences registered under Sections 341, 323, 313, 498A,
406, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act
and Section 4 of Muslim Mahila (Marriage Prohibition) Act.
3. There is allegation against these petitioners that they
have tortured the informant. It is the case that the petitioners
are the in-laws of the informant. Further there is an allegation
that because of demand of dowry and torture miscarriage has
been caused.
4. During course of argument learned counsel for the State
after going through the case-diary very fairly submits that
there is no documentary evidence from any medium to suggest
1
2025:JHHC:16608
that there was a miscarriage. So far as torture and demand are
concerned he submits that there are materials. He also submits
that notices under section 41A has been issued to the
petitioners but they have not appeared. He also admits that
warrant of arrest has yet not been issued.
5. Considering the submission of learned counsels and also
the fact that the petitioners are the in-laws of the informant
and there is no material in the case-diary to substantiate
offence section 313 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court find it
a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands
allowed. The petitioners, above named, are directed to
surrender before the learned court below within four weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event
of their surrender or arrest, they shall be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned JMFC, Madhupur, in connection with
Margomunda P.S. Case No. 53 of 2024, subject to the condition
that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the
petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand,
having sufficient landed property in his/her name or in the
name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and
to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the Trial
Court indicating his/her share in the property.
7. Further it is made clear that once in every 15 days the
petitioners will appear before the investigating officer and
cooperate with the investigation.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
Tanuj/Cp-3
2