Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6684 (JHR)

UMESH MANDAL ALIAS RAJESH MANDAL v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1370/2025 · 2025-07-03

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:17697 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1370 of 2025 ------ Umesh Mandal @ Rajesh Mandal, son of Anandi Mandal, resident of H.N. 176, village Jayanti Gram, PO Mahadeoganj, PS Sahebganj (Muffasil), District Sahebganj … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Victim, wife of late Mohan Thakur, resident of village Gargama, PO and PS Borio (Jirwabari), District Sahibganj … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P. ----- 03/ 03.07.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Sections 376, 313, 363 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is alleged that the informant who is a widow came in contact with the petitioner who is employed in Block Office, Borio. It is alleged that she was the caretaker of the father of the petitioner. It is alleged that six years ago Umesh Mandal on the pretext of marriage took her to his house at Mahadeoganj and after applying vermilion on her head use to establish physical relationship. It is alleged that she became pregnant but the same was aborted by Umesh Mandal by administering some medicine. It is alleged that the son of the informant who is 22 years old was taken by Umesh Mandal and his two brothers and till the date of filing of FIR the son is traceless. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on a false allegation this FIR has been lodged. He submits that the offences alleged in the FIR are under Sections 376, 313, 363 2025:JHHC:17697 2 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that section 363 of the Indian Penal Code is bailable and further there is no medical evidence or any evidence save and except oral statement of the victim which can attract section 313 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that section 376 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be applied in this case as the relationship continued for long six years and after six years this compliant has been made. 5. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that it is the victim who has stated that her pregnancy was aborted at the behest of the petitioner. She further submits that the son of the victim has yet not been recovered and there is direct allegation that this petitioner has raped the victim. 6. After hearing the parties, I find that this is an admitted case of the informant herself that for the last six years they were having physical relationship on the pretext of marriage on the ground that the victim was a widow. The informant did not filed any complaint during this entire period and only after six years she has lodged this case. Further, admittedly there is no medical evidence to attract Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code in the entire case dairy and section 363 of the Indian Penal Code is bailable. 7. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of his surrender or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Sahebganj, in connection with 2025:JHHC:17697 3 Borio(J) P.S. Case No.350 of 2018, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his/her name or in the name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his/her share in the property. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3