Sainath Kr. Mahto @ Sainath Mahto vs State Of Jharkhand

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though there are defect i.e. defect nos.9(i) to (iii) in the bail application as pointed out by the

stamp reporting dated 10.07.2020 but he has filed an undertaking that he shall remove the defect after the lockdown period is over and the bail

application may be heard as it is a regular bail in which petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2019. 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 lockdown period is over.

Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order after the lockdown period is over so as to remove the defects. Heard,

learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar on instruction of learned counsel, Mr. Sidhant Sinha and learned counsel for the State,

Mr. Someshwar Ray.

Petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.01 of 2019, for the offence registered under Sections 347, 376,

323, 325, 420 and 120B IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that admittedly the complainant-informant is the wife of one, Nanhu Mahto, whose marriage was

solemnized on 14.05.2011 and from their wedlock two daughters have been blessed. It is alleged in the complaint petition that this petitioner sowed

seed in the mind of in-laws of the informant that informant is a lady of loose character due to which she was ousted from her in-laws house.

Subsequently it is alleged that on the other hand, this petitioner has also allured the mind of the complainant-informant and has taken her in confidence

and arranged a house for residing her. Petitioner has cheated money of Rs.1,60,000/- withdrawn money of Rs.1,20,000/- from the ATM Card of the

complainant-informant and also established physical relationship on the pretext of marriage with the complainant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner and complainant-informant are major and petitioner has been falsely implicated

in this case because of some monetary transaction, for which Section 376 IPC has been wrongly been added.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2019 and the prosecution case itself seems to be

doubtful. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case lodged under Section 376 IPC Section 420

and other Sections of the IPC, as such, petitioner may not be enlarged on regular bail. After hearing, learned counsel for the parties and perusing the

materials brought on record, it appears that both the parties are major and the complainant- informant was even married having two daughters and

there is delay in lodging the FIR and after having pregnancy of three months she disclosed this fact, as such, petitioner (Sainath Kr. Mahto @ Sainath

Mahto), is directed to be released 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 C.J.M., Ramgarh in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No.01 of 2019 on the following conditions:-

(i) One of the bailors shall be deponent of the present case namely, Abir Banerjee, S/o Jadav Chandra Banerjee, R/o Upper Kumhar Toli, Kumhar

Toli, P.O. & P.S. Hazaribag, District- Hazaribag having UID No.9458 9672 8597. Office is directed to send photo copy of the UID Card bearing No.

9458 9672 8597 of deponent along with this order to the court below so as to verify the authenticity of the bailor.

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each and every date till conclusion of the trial, failing which the learned trial court shall

cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(iii) The Jail Authority shall release the petitioner only after his medical check-up.

(iv) The Civil Surgeon, Hazaribagh is directed to medically examine the petitioner at the time of his release and if require, petitioner shall be taken for

quarantine, but if no such requirement is there, he shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.

(v) Petitioner shall also comply with all the guidelines issued by the Government to meet the challenges of Covid-19, as the country is passing through

Pandemic of Covid-19.