NUTAN BAGE vs STATE OF JHARKHAND — Cr.A(SJ)/507/2008

Disposed: Contested--Appeal Is Allowed on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010174812008

Filing Number

Cr.A(SJ)/9014/2008

Filing Date

30-Apr-2008

Registration No

Cr.A(SJ)/507/2008

Registration Date

30-Apr-2008

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE ( 121 )

Sub-Category

CONVCITION WITH JAIL-IMPRISONMENT UPTO 3 YEARS. ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Appeal Is Allowed

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NUTAN BAGE

    Adv. TRIVENI MISHRA,S. K. MURTTY,S. K. MURTTY, ,NAMITA KUMARI SINHA,NAMITA KUMARI SINHA,NAMITA KUMARI SINHA,NAMITA KUMARI SINHA,SHASHIKANT OJHA,ABHAY KUMAR SINGH,S. K. MURTTY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF JHARKHAND

    Adv. ,GAUTAM RAKESH 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar SrivastavaView PDF

    Case Summary: Nutan Bage v. State of Jharkhand Decision: The Jharkhand High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's conviction and sentence. The appellant was acquitted of charges under IPC Section 493 (deception causing belief of lawful marriage). Reasoning: Although the appellant was acquitted of rape charges (IPC Section 376), the trial court convicted him under Section 493. However, the High Court found that Section 493 requires the accused to induce a belief that an unlawful relationship has become a lawful marriage. Here, the victim never believed she was married—she continued insisting on actual marriage solemnization through panchayats. The two-year consensual relationship was based on a marriage promise, not a deception creating a false belief of marital status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

  4. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar SrivastavaView PDF

  5. 30-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

  6. 09-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

  7. 02-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  9. 19-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  10. 12-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  11. 05-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  12. 22-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  13. 15-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  14. 08-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  15. 18-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  16. 18-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF

  17. 18-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  18. 11-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  19. 04-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  20. 28-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  21. 21-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad

  22. 25-Apr-2025

    Hearing

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Rai

  23. 11-Mar-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar RaiView PDF

  24. 26-Jul-2023

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF

  25. 19-Apr-2023

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF

  26. 02-Nov-2022

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navneet KumarView PDF

  27. 02-Nov-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 30-Apr-2008

    Case filed

    Registration No. Cr.A(SJ)/507/2008

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Nutan Bage v. State of Jharkhand Decision: The Jharkhand High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's conviction and sentence. The appellant was acquitted of charges under IPC Section 493 (deception causing belief of lawful marriage). Reasoning: Although the appellant was acquitted of rape charges (IPC Section 376), the trial court convicted him under Section 493. However, the High Court found that Section 493 requires the accused to induce a belief that an unlawful relationship has become a lawful marriage. Here, the victim never believed she was married—she continued insisting on actual marriage solemnization through panchayats. The two-year consensual relationship was based on a marriage promise, not a deception creating a false belief of marital status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case