The High Court at Ranchi declined to bone a fresh bail prayer rejected earlier in a criminal trial concerning allegations of kidnapping and sexual assault, noting four of seven witnesses were examined and the trial was pending.
No bail granted. Petitioner permitted to renew prayer for bail after four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 4162 of 2016
Shanker Ravidas @ Shankar Rabidas …
… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailendra Jit, Advocate For the Opp. Party : None
04/08.07.2016 Heard Mr. Shailendra Jit, learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of the State.
Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on 08.09.2015 in B. A. No. 4270 of 2015.
The status report which has been received suggests that out of seven witnesses, four have been examined and trial is pending for examination of the victim as well as two official witnesses.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that at the time of the incident the victim was a major and in fact in absence of any medical report which has been submitted along with the case diary no case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is made out.
It appears that the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has supported the act of the petitioner of forcibly kidnapping her and subjecting her to sexual assault.
In view of the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner as also the fact that the trial is progressing, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner at this stage.
However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after four months if the trial is not concluded by that time.
This application stands disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be communicated through FAX to the concerned court.
(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Umesh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the prayer for bail should be reconsidered given the progress of the trial and absence of medical report regarding the victim's age.
Shanker Ravidas @ Shankar Rabidas
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
