High CourtsSingle Bench

Deepu Dushad vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 8 September 2020 · Citation: (2020) 09 JH CK 0077

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kailash Prasad Deo, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 376 · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 5880 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 353 words

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though there are defect nos.9(i) and 9(ii) in the bail application as pointed out by the stamp reporter but he has filed an undertaking that he shall remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts and the bail application may be heard, as it is a regular bail application of the petitioner and petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2020.

Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the bail application on merits but with condition that petitioner shall remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts.

Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order after the physical court starts so as to remove the defects. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Yogesh Modi and learned counsel for the State, Ms. Nehala Sharmin.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.88 of 2020, for the offence registered under Sections 363 and 376 IPC and under Section 4 POCSO Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it appears that victim who is aged about 14 years left her home for purchasing some articles but did not return for few days, as such, on suspicion this case has been instituted.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that victim is putting vermilion on her head showing the inclination of marriage with the petitioner. There is no allegation of committing rape against the petitioner and petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2020, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that victim aged about 14 years and the statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., as such, State may be given some time to file a detail counter-affidavit.

Considering the rival submissions of the parties, learned State counsel is directed to file a detail counter-affidavit within four weeks. List this case after four weeks along with counter-affidavit.