Jeevan Herenj 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 Karra P.S. Case No.22 of 2020 (POCSO Case No.11 of 2020) registered

under sections 363/366A/376DA of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with co-accused persons committed

gang rape upon the minor victim girl of 12 years and also kidnapped another minor victim girl who was ravished by the co-accused persons. It is

further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for a considerable

period of time. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that as the petitioner have committed gang rape upon

the victim minor girl of 12 years and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the minor victim girl of 12 years of age as well as other

minor girl who has also been ravished after being kidnapped by the petitioner and others have supported the case of the prosecution therefore, there is

every chance of the petitioner absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing gang rape upon the minor victim girl of 12 years of age and also

involved in kidnapping of another minor girl who was also being ravished, 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 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.