Harikesh Oraon vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the

stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No.17 of 2020 arising out of Kuru P.S. Case No.34 of

2020 registered under sections 427/456/ 457/458/376/354/354A/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/8 of POCSO Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed gang rape upon the minor

victim girl. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since

30.05.2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the co-accused person has already been

admitted to bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.11.2020 in B.A. No.7692 of 2020. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be

admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand and the learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and drawing attention of

this Court to the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim, it is submitted that the victim is aged 16 years and she has categorically

stated that with the aid of the co-accused, the petitioner has committed gang rape upon her while the petitioner was committing gang rape upon her,

the co-accused was pressing her chest by holding her and there is every chance of the petitioner absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted

that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing gang rape upon the victim minor girl, this Court is of the considered

view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the above named

petitioner is rejected.

Keeping in view the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and the serious nature of offences involved in this case, notwithstanding any order

in administrative side of this Court, the trial court is directed to take up the trial of the case expeditiously and to conclude the trial within six months

from the date of receipt of this order by the trial court. It is made clear that the trial be conducted and witnesses be examined by observing the

precautions relating to COVID -19 Pandemic.