Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Milon Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Milon Devi vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Sep 17, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/972055

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Milon Devi

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi b.a no.5736 of 2012 ------ milon devi . petitioner -versus- the state of jharkhand ..... opposite party ------ coram : the honble mr. justice h.c.mishra ------ for the petitioner : mr.din dayal saha, advocate. for the state : a.p.p. ------ 3/ 17.09.2012 heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the state. the petitioner has been made accused in rajmahal (radhanagar) p.s case no.129 of 2012 corresponding to g.r case no.236 of 2012 for the offence under sections 364 and 120b of the indian penal code. the case appears to have been lodged for kidnapping the daughter of the informant who has married to the son of this petitioner. the petitioner is the mother-in-law of the victim. it appears from the complaint petition, on the basis of which, the police case was lodged, that the victim had herself gone alongwith her husband who is the son of this petitioner and thereafter, she had become traceless. the petitioner was not present while she had gone along with her son. learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. admittedly, the victim had gone alongwith her husband and even the dead body has not been found. learned counsel for the petitioner has accordingly prayed for bail, submitting that the husband of this petitioner has been granted bail in the similar circumstances. learned counsel for the state has opposed the prayer for bail. in the facts of this case, i am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. accordingly, the petitioner, milon devi is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of rs. 10,000/-(rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of smt. s. soreng, learned j.m., 1st class, rajmahal, or her successor, in rajmahal (radhanagar) p.s case no.129 of 2012 corresponding to g.r case no.236 of 2012. (h.c.mishra, j.) b.s/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.5736 of 2012 ------ Milon Devi . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr.Din Dayal Saha, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ 3/ 17.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S Case No.129 of 2012 corresponding to G.R Case No.236 of 2012 for the offence under Sections 364 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The case appears to have been lodged for kidnapping the daughter of the informant who has married to the son of this petitioner. The petitioner is the mother-in-law of the victim. It appears from the complaint petition, on the basis of which, the police case was lodged, that the victim had herself gone alongwith her husband who is the son of this petitioner and thereafter, she had become traceless. The petitioner was not present while she had gone along with her son. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Admittedly, the victim had gone alongwith her husband and even the dead body has not been found. Learned counsel for the petitioner has accordingly prayed for bail, submitting that the husband of this petitioner has been granted bail in the similar circumstances. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Milon Devi is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Smt. S. Soreng, learned J.M., 1st class, Rajmahal, or her successor, in Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S Case No.129 of 2012 corresponding to G.R Case No.236 of 2012. (H.C.Mishra, J.) B.S/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial