2025:JHHC:12999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 147 of 2025 ------ Baburam Murmu age about 17 years, S/o Charan Murmu, Revisionist is minors, hence represented through his natural guardian Father namely Charan Murmu, S/o Baburam Murmu, R/o Kaldam, P.O & P.S-Littipara, Dist-Pakur, Jharkhand …… Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Victim X, D/o Late Y, W/o Z, R/o Gamhariya, P.O. and P.S- Littipara, Dist-Pakur, Jharkhand …… Opp. Parties ------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the petitioner : Mr. Yasir Arafat, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, APP. ------ 04/Dated:30th April, 2025 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the Juvenile petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 08.10.2024 passed by Sri Kumar Kranti Prasad, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Pakur in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2024 by which appeal has been dismissed and the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner has been rejected thereby affirming the order dated 21.05.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board (In-charge), Pakur in Misc. Criminal Application No.762 of 2024 in connection with Littipara (Simlong O.P) P.S Case No.13 of 2023 instituted under Section 376 of IPC. 2. It is alleged in the F.I.R that the prosecutrix who is mother of two children was left by her husband. Thereafter, while she was left by her husband, it is alleged that the petitioner had committed rape upon her on the pretext of marriage and he used to make physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage but later on, he refused to marry with her. 2025:JHHC:12999 2 3. Heard Md. Yasir Arafat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned P.P. for the State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Court below is illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that allegation of commission of rape upon the informant is incorrect and informant is major lady and mother of two children and she has been left by her husband. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since 24.04.2023 i.e. for more than two years. It is submitted that father of the petitioner is ready to take custody of the Juvenile. It is submitted that there is no adverse report against him in Social Investigation Report and hence the Juvenile petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellant for committing rape upon the Victim lady on the pretext of marriage. It is submitted that the Victim lady during her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C has supported the allegation of rape upon her. It is submitted that several witnesses including the villagers have stated that there was love affair between the Juvenile petitioner and the informant and the petitioner had agreed to marry with the Victim lady but later on the petitioner had refused to marry with her and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected. 6. Perused the Lower Court and considered the submission of both the sides. 7. It reveals from the FIR that the petitioner is alleged to have established physical relationship with the Victim lady aged around 32 years on the pretext of marriage by about one year. 8. It also appears from the statement of Victim lady recorded 2025:JHHC:12999 3 under section 164 Cr.P.C that she had worked with the Juvenile petitioner for some time and which was resulted into love affair between the petitioner and the Victim lady and she lived with him for around four months and the petitioner had established physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. 9. It appears that the informant is a major lady and aged more than 32 years. It also appears that the Juvenile is in custody since 24.04.2023. 10. Considering the fact that the informant is major lady and mother of two children and considering the custody of the petitioner, the Juvenile petitioner- Baburam Murmu is directed to be released on bail in care and supervision of his Natural Guardian and his Father namely, Charan Murmu on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Magistrate of the Juvenile Justice Board, Pakur in connection with Littipara (Simlong O.P) P.S case No.13 of 2023, subject to the condition that father of the petitioner must file an Undertaking before the learned Court below that the juvenile-petitioner will not get indulged in such type of crime in future again, otherwise prosecution will be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail and the father of the juvenile-petitioner will submit his mobile number before the learned Court below, which he will always keep active and will not change it, during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of the Court and shall produce the juvenile-petitioner as and when required. 11. Accordingly, in view of the above, the judgment dated the judgment dated 08.10.2024 passed by Sri Kumar Kranti Prasad, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Pakur in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2024 and the order dated 21.05.2024 passed by learned 2025:JHHC:12999 4 Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board (In-charge), Pakur in Misc. Criminal Application No.762 of 2024 in connection with Littipara (Simlong O.P) P.S Case No.13 of 2023, are set aside. 12. Thus, the Criminal Revision No. 147 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Saket/