1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:21411 ) THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 191 of 2025 --------- Dilip Guriya, represented through his mother and natural guardian Basanti Guriya ..… Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Respondent ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD --------- For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Adv. For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P. --------- 06/15.07.2025 This Crimilnal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant challenging the order dated 09.01.2025, passed in M.C.A. No. 37 of 2025, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, by which prayer for bail made on behalf of the appellant, namely Dilip Guriya has been rejected in connection with Kiriburu P.S. Case No. 09 of 2024, corresponding to Children Case No.03 of 2024 , instituted for the offences under Section 376 (3) of I.P.C. and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 2. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that the mother of the victim girl noticed that her daughter-the victim girl is pregnant. On pressuring, the victim girl revealed that the appellant has committed rape upon her on Rakshabandhan and she is carrying the pregnancy of around Eight (08) months. 2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:21411 ) 3. Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 4. It is submitted that the order passed by the learned Court below rejecting the bail of the appellant is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the allegation against the appellant is false and concocted. It is submitted that there is delay of more than Eight (08) months in lodging the F.I.R. and the victim girl did not disclose the commission of rape upon her for several months. It is submitted that the appellant is a juvenile and he is in custody since 10.04.2024 and hence, he is entitled to be released on bail under the provision of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act as the gravity of offence is not to be seen in case of juvenile. It is submitted that neither the victim girl nor her mother has appeared despite notice issued by this Court being served upon her and hence, the appellant 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 has committed the heinous act of committing rape upon the victim girl, who is the own cousin sister of the appellant. It is submitted that the delay is not material in this case as the victim girl was a minor, aged around 14 years (Fourteen years). It is submitted that the victim girl has supported her case during her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and even the medical report dated 19.04.2024 reveals that she was carrying pregnancy of Eight months. It is submitted that the trial 3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:21411 ) is going on and hence, prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Perused the F.I.R. and the Lower Court Record of this case and considered the submission of both sides. 7. It appears that though the F.I.R. is delayed for Eight (08) months, but from evidence it appears that the victim girl was a minor and was aged about 14 years on the date of occurrence and the appellant, who is the own cousin brother of the victim girl, had committed rape upon her on the eve of Rakshabandhan. 8. It further reveals from the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she has supported the commission of rape upon her by this juvenile appellant. 9. It further reveals that the charges have already been framed against the appellant and the trial is going on and even the victim girl and her mother were examined by P.W.1 and P.W.3 before the learned Trial Court. 10. As the trial is in progress and hence, this Court is refraining itself from discussing the evidence of the witnesses on merit, but this Court finds that the victim girl and her mother has been examined in full detail and thoroughly cross-examined and as such, this Court refrains from giving any finding on the evidence. 11. This is a case of committing rape upon the victim girl by the juvenile-appellant, who is the cousin brother of the victim girl and therefore, this Court is not 4 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:21411 ) inclined to enlarge this appellant on bail and the prayer for bail is rejected at this stage. 12. Accordingly, order dated 09.01.2025, passed in M.C.A. No. 37 of 2025, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), West Singhbhum at Chaibasa is affirmed. 13. Thus, Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 191 of 2025 is dismissed. 14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) s.m.