Jharkhand High Court
Motu Khan @ Monajir Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 August, 2018
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.691 of 2018
------
Motu Khan @ Monajir Khan .... .... .... Appellant Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Shilpa Kumari
3. Anu Kumari .... .... .... Respondents
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Agarwal, Advocate
For the State : Addl.P.P.
For the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 : None
------
Order No.06 Dated- 07.08.2018
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
Though notice was issued to respondent Nos.2 and 3 but no one appears on their behalf.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 06.04.2018 passed in B.P. No.349 of 2018 by In-charge, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla in connection with Ahtu Basiya Gumla P.S. Case No.46 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.878 of 2016 registered under Section 363/365/370/371 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 75/79 of J.J. Act, Section 16/18 of B.L. Act, section 25/26 of I.S.M.W. Act, Section 3 (1)(xi)(xii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 4 of POCSO Act, whereby and where under Incharge, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla rejected his prayer for regular bail.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below failed to take note of the fact that the appellant has been in custody since 29.03.2018 and the main allegation is against co-accused namely Afsar Khan. Drawing attention of this Court towards page-26 of the brief which is the copy of the certified copy of the petition filed by the informant- Salma Kumari, wherein she has categorically mentioned that the appellant has been implicated in this case at the behest of Naina Devi, it is submitted that the allegation against the appellant are false. It is lastly submitted that other co- accused with similar allegations have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 31.07.2018 in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.713 of 2018. Hence, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside, and the appellant be enlarged on bail.
Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State opposed the prayer and defended the impugned order.
Considering the facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where the appellant be enlarged on bail hence the impugned order dated 06.04.2018 passed in B.P. No.349 of 2018 by In-charge, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla, being not sustainable in law, is set aside and the appellant, named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla, in connection with Ahtu Basiya Gumla P.S. Case No.46 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.878 of 2016.
This appeal stands allowed.
Animesh/ (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)