( 2025:JHHC:34416 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 479 of 2025 ------ Gauri Shankar Mishra ……Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Informant .…..Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, A.P.P ------ ORAL ORDER IN COURT Order No: 04/ Dated: 14.11.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the order dated 09.05.2025 passed in M.C.A No. 337 of 2025 by Sri. Kumar Pawan, learned Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Godda in connection with SC/ST P.S Case No. 01 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 61(2), 59, 84, 89, 123, 351(3) 3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 read with Section 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by which the regular bail of the appellant has been rejected. 2. As per the F.I.R, the appellant is alleged to have established physical relationship with the informant for around five (05) years on the pretext of marriage and also abused the informant in the name of her caste. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the order dated 09.05.2025 passed by the learned Court below is illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the ( 2025:JHHC:34416 ) 2 appellant is merely alleged to have established physical relationship with the informant for around five (05) years on the pretext of marriage. It is submitted that the allegations against the appellant are false and concocted and the informant is a married lady and a mother of two children. It is further submitted that the relationship if any, between the appellant and the informant, was consensual in nature. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since 22.03.2025 and hence, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the appellant has abused the informant in the name of her caste and established physical relationship with her for around five (5) years. It is submitted that the appellant and his family members had planned to kill her and hence, she fled away and hence, the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 5. Learned counsel for the informant, after adopting the submission of learned counsel for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellant for committing rape upon the victim lady on the pretext of marriage and he exploited her for around five (05) years. It is submitted that the victim girl during her statement recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S has fully supported the prosecution case and hence, the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from going through the records, it appears the appellant is alleged to have established physical relationship for around five (05) years. 7. It also appears that the informant is a major lady and a ( 2025:JHHC:34416 ) 3 mother of two children and was aged around 40 years on the date of occurrence. 8. It appears that the relationship between the appellant and the informant was consensual in nature. 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare versus State of Maharashtra and Another reported in 2024 SC Online SC 3471 has held that in long consensual relationship between the accused and the prosecutrix, the criminal liability attached to such false promise would be diluted after such a long passage of time. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant namely Gauri Shankar Mishra is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing his bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri. Kumar Pawan, learned Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Godda/or his successor Court in connection with SC/ST P.S Case No. 01 of 2025. 11. Thus, this Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 479 of 2025 is allowed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated: 14.11.2025 Nishant/Avinash/