Manilal Yadav And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 September, 2017

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Manilal Yadav And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 September, 2017

Bench: Anant Bijay Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI                                                          
                      A.B.A. No. 3702 of 2016

1. Manilal Yadav
2. Hiralal Yadav
3. Degal Yadav                                                        ...... Petitioners
                                Versus 
1.The State of Jharkhand
2. Naresh Yadav
3. Yasoda Kumari                                                      ...........Opposite Parties


CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
For the Petitioners   :Mr.  Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the State          :A.P.P.
                        ........

 09/Dated: 11/09/2017   
       The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Godda (M) P.S. 

Case No. 142 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 468 of 2015 for the offence under  

sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 8 of the  

POCSO Act.

       It appears that despite valid service of notice, O.P. Nos. 2 & 3 failed to appear 

and the matter is being heard on merit.

       Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been 

falsely implicated in this case. Further, it has been submitted that the main allegation is  

against Bhuwaneshwar Yadav  who is not the petitioner at present. 

       Learned A.P.P opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

       From perusal of para 7 of the original case diary, it appears that the the witness 

has categorically disclosed the name of Bhuwneshwar Yadav.

       In the facts and circumstances of the case,   the above named petitioners are 

directed  to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from the date of this order 

and in the event of their arrest or surrender the Court below shall enlarge the above  

named   petitioners   on   bail   on   furnishing   bail   bond   of   Rs.   10,000/   (Rupees   ten 

thousand)each, with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of   the 

court of Special  Judge, Godda in  connection with  Godda (M)  P.S. Case No.  142  of 

2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 468 of 2015(Special (P) Case No. 3/2015 subject to 

the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C and also subject to the 

condition that the petitioners will deposit Rs.10,000/ each as interim compensation 
 before the trial court on the date of their surrender. Thereafter, trial court will issue 

notice   to   the  informant    and  his daughter   Yashoda  Kumari(victim) and  after   their 

appearance   the   aforesaid   amount   would   be   released   in   favour   of   Yashoda   Kumari 

(victim) after making proper verification.

        It appears that under order dated 25.07.2017, show cause notice was directed to 

be issued to the concerned court as to why despite requisition and express reminder, 

case diary has not been transmitted and also to disclose the name of the concerned I.O, 

who is responsible for transmission of the   case diary, so that a contempt proceeding 

against   the   learned   Special   Judge   and   the   concerned   I.O   may   be   initiated   for   not 

complying the order of this Court.

        Now the case diary has been received.

        From perusal of showcause reply submitted by Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned 

District & Addl. Sessions JudgeI, Godda, in which it has been mentioned that he has 

taken ample steps for submission of case diary and in this regard a letter no. 176 dated 

19.11.2016

was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Godda for transmission of the case diary, thereafter again after receiving the reminder from the Hon'ble Court, a reminder to the Superintendent of Police, Godda vide letter no. 50 dated 24.03.2017 to comply the order of the Hon'ble Court vide letter no. 176 dated 19.11.2016, vide letter no. 24.03.2017 again a request was made for transmission of the case diary. Thereafter again letter no. 86 dated 20.06.2017 express reminder was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Godda for directly transmitting the case diary of Godda (M) P.S. Case No. 142 of 2015. Further, a communication from the Superintendent of Police, Godda vide letter no. 456 dated 07.08.2017 where the name of the I.O of the case was disclosed as B.N. Bhagat who is responsible for noncompliance of order passed by the Hon'ble Court. However, it has also been informed to this Court that the neatly typed duly certified copy of case diary has been deposited in the Hon'ble Court by the Investigating Officer in the office of A.P.PSri Satish Kr. Keshri.

Under these circumstances, the Superintendent of Police, Godda is directed to take appropriate administrative action against the I.O of the case namely, B.N. Bhagat and in this regard, submit report to this court within 16 weeks.

List this case after sixteen weeks under the heading for "Orders." Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the trial court, to the Superintendent of Police, Godda through FAX and a copy of this order be handed over to the learned A.P.P for its transmission to the Superintendent of Police, Godda for compliance.

Satyarthi/                                                    (Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court