Jharkhand High Court
Hemant Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand ......Opposite ... on 23 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 5376 of 2024
Hemant Kumar ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ......Opposite party
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. S.B. Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, A.P.P.
.....
Order No.09/ Dated:23.08.2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Special POCSO Case No.03 of 2023 arising out of T.Tangar P.S. Case No.58 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Section 376DA, 341, 323, 325, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 & 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 6/12 POCSO Act was added vide order dated 04.01.2023, pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Simdega.
3. As per FIR, allegation is that on 31.10.2022 at about 12.00 O'clock informant along with her parents had gone to the house of her maternal uncle situated at Konmenjara Ledrotoli. At about 09:00 P.M., she along with her family members went to watch dance programme in the Ind mela Bazartand, Konmenjara. While the informant alongwith her acquainted friend, namely, Manoj Baraik was returning to the house of her maternal uncle, at about 2.30 A.M. in the night as they reached Bagicha Toli, three unknown persons were standing there and they started assaulted them with fist and legs, out of fear Manoj Baraik fled away from there. It is alleged that accused persons took her to veranda of Government Anganbari center at Chotka toil and forcibly committed rape with her. In the meantime one another unknown person came, who also committed rape with her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial custody since 01.12.2022 without any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution, hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there are sufficient materials against the petitioner showing his involvement in the present case, hence he does not deserve bail.
6. It appears that progress report of the trial has been called for which has been submitted by the concerned trial court and it is reported that out of 13 charge sheeted witnesses 10 witnesses have been examined. Only three witnesses are left to be examined by the prosecution and tentative period of conclusion of trial is opined to be three months. It is a case of gang rape.
7. Considering the serious nature of offence and also in the interest of smooth trial of the case , I do not feel inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at the fag end of the trial. However if trial is not concluded within three months as tentative period opined by the concerned trial court, the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) R.K/