1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.379/2024
(@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.9898/2023)
AMZAD ANSARI Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Nobody appears for Respondent No.2, though duly served. Earlier also, an opportunity was granted by this Court to the said Respondent to appear as per the order dated
14-12-2023.
3. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 14-10-2022 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.642/2022,
whereby the High Court has cancelled the bail granted to the appellant in terms of Order dated 29-9-2021 passed in ABA No.4574/2021 in connection with PCR Case No.287/2019 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara, Jharkhand.
4. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and after carefully perusing the impugned order passed by the High Court, we are of the considered opinion that the bail granted to the appellant ought not to have been cancelled by the High Court on the ground that the appellant abandoned the respondent No.2 wife. It appears that there were allegations and cross-allegations made by the appellant and Respondent No.2 against each other. According to the appellant, Respondent No.2 had
abandoned him and according to Respondent No.2, the appellant had abandoned her when both of them were going together on the motor cycle.

5. Apart from the fact that there are disputed facts, in our opinion, even the condition that the appellant will keep and maintain the opposite party as his legally-wedded wife with dignity and honour as and when opposite party viz. Respondent No.2 becomes ready to resume conjugal life with the appellant imposed by the High Court in its order dated 14-10-2022 was not legally tenable.
6. Though it is true that over and above the conditions mentioned in Section 437 (3), the Court can impose such conditions as it may consider necessary in the interest of justice, while granting regular bail or anticipatory bail, the Court should avoid imposing such conditions which are vague in nature or incapable of execution, or the breach of which is difficult to ascertain.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of considered opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained, and hence is hereby set aside.
8. The interim order dated 11-8-2023 passed by this Court staying arrest of the appellant is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
9. The appeal stands allowed in the above-terms.
J (BELA M. TRIVEDI)
J (UJJAL BHUYAN)
NEW DELHI;
24 th JANUARY, 2024.

ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.13 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9898/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14-10-2022
in CRMP No. 642/2022 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at
Ranchi)
AMZAD ANSARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 147732/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 206258/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. & IA
No. 147734/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Date : 24-01-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Jay Kishor Singh, AOR
Mr. Bijay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Mohit Raj, Adv.
Mr. Ram Krishan Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Ram Krishan Kumar, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Madhusmita Bora, AOR
Mr. Dipankar Singh, Adv.
Mrs. Anupama Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Exemption Applications are allowed.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appeal stands allowed, in terms of the signed order.
(VISHAL ANAND) (MAMTA RAWAT)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed Order is placed on the file)