High CourtsSingle Bench

Manish Lohra vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 11 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 JH CK 0117

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376DA · Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4, 6 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 949 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

20 paragraphs · 393 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

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

present.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tatisilway P.S. Case No. 04 of 2019, corresponding to POCSO No.20 of 2019 registered

under sections 376DA of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape upon the minor victim girl. It is

submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court to the statement of the victim recorded in connection with

Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.13 of 2019, relating to the same occurrence, it is submitted that that in the said statement recorded under Section 164

Cr.P.C. of the victim, she has categorically stated that the petitioner has established physical relationship with her consent. It is further submitted that

for the self- same occurrence, two cases being Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.13 of 2019 and Tatisilway P.S. Case No. 04 of 2019 have been registered.

It is also submitted that the medical examination report of the victim suggests that the victim has no recent sign of sexual intercourse nor any injury

was found on the private parts of the victim and the petitioner has not ravished the victim. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-

operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.01.2019 as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the bail

application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts of this case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty

five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-IV- cum-Special Judge,

POCSO, Ranchi in connection with Tatisilway P.S. Case No. 04 of 2019, corresponding to POCSO No.20 of 2019 with the condition that he will co-

operate with the trial of the case.