1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 05 of 2025 Suben Munda aged about 19 years, son of Shukhlal Munda, resident of Ramseli, P.O. Baresarn, P.S. Baresarn, District Latehar … Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim (xxx) through guardian (xxx) …… Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rahul, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Mahua Palit, A.P.P. ….. Order No.09 / Dated: 12.06.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015) by challenging the order dated 05.03.2024 in Misc. Criminal Application No. 153 of 2024 passed by the learned Additional Session’s Judge-1-cum- Special Judge, Latehar in connection with Baresanr P.S. Case No. 4 of 2022 corresponding to Children Court Case No. 1 of 2024, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 342, 323, 324, 376D of IPC and 4/6 of POCSO Act by which the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected . 2. The Victim girl has alleged in the FIR that on 15.05.2022 while she was searching one of her friend then she was apprehended by four (04) persons namely Rinku Singh, Pradeep Munda, Suben Munda (i.e the appellant) and Budhram Munda and who took her near rock and committed gang rape upon her one by one 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned Courts below are 2 illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the medical does has not support the prosecution case. It is submitted that appellant is a student purusing study. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since 18.05.2022 i.e. more then three (03) years and hence he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the appellant and another co- accused have committed gang rape upon the victim girl which is supported by the several witnesses in the case diary. It is submitted that the appellant also confessed the guilt which is mentioned at para 28 of the case diary and hence the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Perused the FIR, case diary and considering the submissions of both the sides. 7. It appears from the FIR that the appellant and three (03) other persons had committed gang rape upon the victim girl on 15.05.2022 and 16.05.2022. 8. It appears that the victim girl during her statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has again supported the allegation for committing gang rape upon her by the appellant Suben Munda and co-accused namely Rinku Singh, Pradeep Munda and Budhram Munda respectively 9. It appears that six witnesses have already been examined so far , however the Informant has not been examined till date . 10. This Court refrains itself from giving any finding of the evidence of prosecution witnesses as it may prejudice the case of the parties. 11. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail at this stage and hence the prayer of bail of the 3 appellant is rejected. 12. The learned Trial Court below is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously as possible. 13. Thus this Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 5 of 2025 is, hereby dismissed. 14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Bibha/