Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14253 (JHR)

PRAMILA MURMU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./3291/2024 · 2025-03-06

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3291 of 2024 ------ Pramila Murmu, Aged about 30 years, Daughter of Churka Murmu, wife of Benedik Soren @ Bittu, Resident of Village – Hijari, Post Office –Kamaldori, Police Station –Bowarijore, District –Godda, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. S.N.P. Rai, Advocate : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.11 Dated- 06.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Lalmatiya P.S. Case No.47 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 341/323/376(2)(n)/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the wife of the co-accused–Benedik Soren has made the intimate photographs of Benedik and the informant viral through social media. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and only suspicion has been raised against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the main allegation is against Benedik Soren and this case has been foisted by the informant to harass the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-12 of the instant anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, she shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.10,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Godda, in connection with Lalmatiya P.S. Case No.47 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish her mobile number and a copy of her Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that she will not change her mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-