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
6 paragraphs · 291 wordsSanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 257 of 2020, for the alleged offences under Sections 366-A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Chatra.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only bald allegations are there against the petitioner. He submits that the victim herself has stated that nothing has been done with her. He further submits that the other co-accused persons have been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 9913 of 2023 and A.B.A. No. 645 of 2024.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer on the ground that the case is arising under the POCSO Act.
Considering that in the similar circumstance, other co-accused persons have been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 9913 of 2023 and A.B.A. No. 645 of 2024 and the petitioner is identically placed and in view of the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, he is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty-five thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Chatra, in connection with Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 257 of 2020, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.