Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9327 (JHR)

DASRATH MARANDI v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3564/2025 · 2025-05-02

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:13348 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3564 of 2025 ------ Dasrath Marandi, aged about 26 years, son of Budhan Marandi, resident of Village-Lukaiya, P.O.-Hirodih, P.S.- Hirodih, Dist.-Giridih … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram L. Yadav, Advocate : Mr. Ashutosh Kr. Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Abhinav Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 02.05.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Deori P.S. Case No.364 of 2020 (POCSO Case No. 141 of 2024) registered for the offences punishable under sections 366A/376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/8 of POCSO Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner procured the minor victim girl and committed rape upon her. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the victim has been examined as P.W.1 and she has categorically stated her age to be 20 years and her age has also been assessed by the learned trial court to be 20 years; she has categorically stated that the petitioner has not done anything to her. She has further stated that under the pressure of police, she gave a false statement in court. It is next submitted that in this case altogether five witnesses have been examined during the trial and the rest witnesses being P.Ws.2 to 5 have all been declared hostile; on the prayer prosecution, as have not supported the case of the prosecution. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.08.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 02 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih, in connection with Deori P.S. Case No.364 of 2020 (POCSO Case No. 141 of 2024)with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/