Jharkhand High Court
Basant Nag Alias Rohit Kumar Alias Rohit ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 31 March, 2016
Author: Ravi Nath Verma
Bench: Ravi Nath Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
A. B. A. No.352 of 2016
Basant Nag @ Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Sundi, S/o Lal Mohan Nag, R/o
Village :- Bikma, P.O.:-Salegutu, P.S. :- Kamdara, District :- Gumla.
..... Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA
For the Petitioner(s) : M/s Devesh Krishna,
Priyanka Bobby, Advocates.
For the State : Mr. Moti Gope, A.P.P.
-----
02/31.03.2016. The sole petitioner, Basant Nag @ Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Sundi, apprehending his arrest has prayed for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Ahtu P.S. Case No.05 of 2015 instituted under Sections 363 /370/371/372 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the State.
The prosecution case as it appears from the FIR is that 28.04.2015, the daughter of the informant, namely, Balema Banra and her friend, Chandu Lagun went to see result of the matriculation examination whereafter they were shown the result by this petitioner and one Saheel Sundi @ Jai Marsah Sundi called them at Kharsawan Railway Station where the accused persons gave cold-drinks mixed with intoxicant to the girls who became unconscious. Thereafter the accused persons took them to Surat and from Surat, information was given to the informant.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and in fact the friend of this petitioner, Saheel Sundi @ Jai Marsah Sundi had called two girls and thereafter took them to Surat. It was also submitted that both the victim girls are major and they went out of the house by their own accord and in fact, Saheel Sundi is in love with the daughter of the informant. It was also submitted that the petitioner is a student and has not committed any offence, as alleged at all.
Learned counsel representing the State relying upon the statement of the victim girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C. opposed the prayer for bail.
On perusal of the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it appears that the petitioner along with friend, Saheel Sundi after calling two girls, gave cold-drinks mixed with intoxicant and thereafter took them to Surat.
-2-In view of the allegations and the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. , I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and hence, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is hereby, rejected.
However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within two weeks and prays for regular bail, the court below shall consider the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.
Sandeep/ (Ravi Nath Verma, J.)