Allowed

Pravesh Vishwakarma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC19 Jun 2018Cr.A(SJ)/342/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed the appeal and set aside the order refusing bail. The court directed the release of the appellant on depositing a demand draft for victim compensation and furnishing a bail bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; appellant directed to be released on bail on deposit of victim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties.

Pravesh Vishwakarma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.342 of 2018

¶3

Pravesh Vishwakarma .... .... …. Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Madhu Kumari .... .... 3. Ajay Bedia .... Respondents

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

------ For the Appellant : Mr. A. Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P. ------

¶7

Order No.04 Dated- 19.06.2018

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Addl. P.P. for the

¶9

State.

¶10

Though notice was validly served upon the respondent no.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the respondent no.2 in-spite of repeated calls.

¶11

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cumSpecial Judge (POCSO), Garhwa in connection with POCSO Case No.01 of 2017, arising out of Bhawnathpur P.S. Case No.01 of 2017 registered under Sections 376/341/323/307/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of POCSO Act and under Section 3 (1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby and whereunder the learned court below rejected his prayer for regular bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below failed to take note of the fact that the appellant has been in custody since 07.06.2017 and the appellant was a minor at the time of occurrence. It is further submitted that there is no averment in the written report that the appellant is not a member of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and that the settlement has been arrived at between the parties and in terms of the settlement, the appellant is ready and willing to pay Rs.50,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the respondent no.3 without prejudice to his defence in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the impugned order of learned court below be set aside and the appellant be admitted to bail.

¶13

The learned Addl.P.P. defends the impugned order and opposes the prayer for bail.

¶14

Considering the submissions of the learned counsels and the facts of the case, I am of the considered opinion that this is a fit case where the appellant be released on bail. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.01.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Garhwa in connection with POCSO Case No.01 of 2017, arising out of Bhawnathpur P.S. Case No.01 of 2017, being not sustainable in law is set aside and the appellant named above, is directed to be released on bail on his depositing demand draft of Rs.50,000/- drawn in favour of respondent no.3-Ajay Bedia and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cumSpecial Judge (POCSO), Garhwa in connection with POCSO Case No.01 of 2017, arising out of Bhawnathpur P.S. Case No.01 of 2017 during the pendency of the case.

¶15

In case, the appellant deposits the demand draft in the court below, the court below is directed to issue notice to the respondent no.3-Ajay Bedia and release the said demand draft in his favour, after proper identification.

¶16

In the result, this appeal stands allowed.

¶17

Sonu/Gunjan-

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

Pravesh Vishwakarma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravesh Vishwakarma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Prasad Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pritam Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Quarban Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chitranjan Mahto Alias Chitu Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bishnu Sah Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ranjeet Singh Alias Ranjeet K Singh Vs State of Jharkhand