High CourtsSingle Bench

Kartik Kumar Mandal vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 7 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 JH CK 0039

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3473 Of 2021
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

5 paragraphs · 383 words

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective sides. Defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No. 154 of 2020.

It has been alleged that the daughter of the informant was enticed away by the petitioner for the purposes of marriage.

On being recovered the victim had got recorded her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has stated that she was having a love affair with the petitioner and eloped with the petitioner on 24.11.2020. She has further stated that she was carrying a pregnancy of 8 months.

When the matter was heard learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the victim was not pregnant at which the learned APP was directed to take instruction and submit a copy of the case diary. Accordingly necessary instruction has been taken by the learned APP and the copy of the case diary has also been sent to this Court through e.mail.

It appears from a perusal of the enquiry conducted on 06.04.2021 that the victim was not pregnant and she has stated that out of nervousness she had disclosed that she was carrying a pregnancy of 8 months. The 164 Cr.P.C. statement does not reveal any incident of physical relationship having been established between the petitioner and the victim prior to 24.11.2020 i.e. on the date they had eloped and gone to Gujarat. The 164 Cr.P.C. statement has been recorded on 16.12.2020 and on consideration of the above it does appear that the victim had mistakenly stated that she was carrying a pregnancy of 8 months. Although the learned counsel for the informant submits that the victim was aged 13 years when the incident had taken place, but her age has been assessed as 17 years by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar and she has disclosed her age as 20 years. The victim had also refused to get herself medically examined. The petitioner appears to be in custody since 15.12.2020 On consideration of the aforesaid facts, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No. 154 of 2020.