2025:JHHC:37539 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 485 of 2025 …. Shahil Minz, aged about 17 years, S/o- Sri Supriyan Minz, R/o Village- Mahugai, PO & PS Bhandariya, District- Garhwa, State- Jharkhand represented through his mother and legal guardian Suchita Minj, aged about 38 years, W/o Sri Supriyan Minz, R/o vill- Mahugai, PO & PS Bhandariya, District- Garhwa, State- Jharkhand ……Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Guardian of victim ‘X’ ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Juhi Kumari, Advocate Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Mohua Palit, A.P. P. For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT 06/09.12.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under section 101(5) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act for grant of regular bail by challenging the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Special Judge, Children Court, Garhwa in Misc. Criminal Application No. 363 of 2025, arising out of Children Case No. 06/2025 (Bhandariya PS Case No. 20/2024) for the offences under Sections 376(D), 323, 341, 342, 452, 504, 506 and 366(A) IPC and Section 4, 6 & 8 of POCSO Act, by which, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected. 2. Perused the reports sent by Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned 2025:JHHC:37539 2 Special Judge POCSO-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-1-Cum- FTC (CAW), Garhwa vide Letter No.251 of 2025 dated 04.12.2025 by which it has been informed that charges have been framed against the appellant under Sections 376-D, 376(2)(n), 323, 341, 342, 450, 504, 506 and 366 of IPC and Sections 6 & 8 of POCSO Act. It has also been informed that one witness (victim girl) has been examined out of eight charge sheeted witnesses and the next date is fixed for evidence on 11.12.2025, let it be kept on record. 3. As per FIR arising out of Complaint Case No. 05/2024 instituted by the victim girl against the appellant and three others. The appellant and three others were alleged to have committed gang rape upon the victim girl on 02.12.2023 firstly and thereafter the sole appellant is also alleged to have committed rape upon the victim girl on 21.12.2023 repeatedly and lastly she was also assaulted by the appellant and his brothers on 21.12.2023 and forced her mother to get the case compromised. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and has committed no offence. It is submitted that the appellant and victim girl are known to each other since long. It is submitted that no rape was committed upon the victim girl by the appellant. It is submitted that physical relation between the parties was consensual in nature even if the victim girl is minor. 5. It is submitted that medical report does not corroborate the prosecution case for committing rape upon the victim girl. It is submitted that victim girl has already been examined during the trial and thus there is no apprehension of any threat upon her. The appellant is in custody since 10.07.2024 and hence the appellant 2025:JHHC:37539 3 may be enlarged on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail. It is submitted that the appellant is named in the FIR and the appellant and another accused persons have committed gang rape upon the victim girl several times which is supported by the victim girl during her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC on 26.04.2024 and hence, prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 7. Learned counsel for the informant, after adopting the submission of the learned APP, has further submitted that the appellant had committed rape upon the victim girl forcibly against her own wishes on 21.12.2023 and the allegation of committing physical relation with consent is denied. It is submitted that the victim girl was raped by putting her in fear of pistol and she was raped repeatedly several times after 02.12.2023. It is submitted that even the police was not lodging the FIR and hence she was forced to inform the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa for instituting the case and thereafter the case has been instituted. It is submitted that victim girl has been examined during trial also as PW-1 and she has fully supported the commission of rape upon her by the appellant and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected. 8. Perused the records of this case and case diary and considered the submissions of learned counsels for both the sides. 9. It appears that the complainant victim girl has instituted Complaint Case No. 05 of 2024 against the appellant and three others for committing gang rape upon her on 02.12.2023 because she was also subjected to rape several times by the appellant on 21.12.2023 by putting her in fear of pistol and also by blackmailing her. 2025:JHHC:37539 4 10. It appears that police had submitted charge-sheet against the appellant and even the charges have been framed against the appellant by the learned Trial Court under Sections 376-D, 376(2)(n), 323, 341, 342, 450, 504, 506 and 366 of IPC and Sections 6 & 8 of POCSO Act. 11. It appears from the submission of the parties that victim girl has also been examined and she is said to have supported the prosecution case. 12. This Court at this stage refrains itself from scrutinizing the evidence of the victim girl on merit as it will prejudice the case of both the sides. 13. However, considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the appellant for committing gang rape upon the victim girl and hence this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant at this stage. 14. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 485 of 2025 is, hereby, dismissed. 15. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated: 09.12.2025 RKM/ Uploaded 25.12.2025