The High Court of Jharkhand admitted the petitioner to bail in a POCSO and IPC case, directing him to deposit Rs. 35,000 towards victim rehabilitation through the trial court.
Petitioner admitted to bail on furnishing Rs. 25,000 bonds with two sureties and depositing Rs. 35,000 for victim rehabilitation.
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. 1280 of 2019
Md. Sajid ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party
--------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH --------- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Nalini Jha, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P.
07/Dated: 13/05/2019
Petitioner is accused in Mango (MGM) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 2553 of 2018, registered for the offence under Sections 354, 354A, 506 of the I.P.C. and Section 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
It appears that under order dated 23.04.2019, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to file supplementary affidavit indicating as to whether charges have been framed or not and further learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to take instruction from her client as to whether petitioner is ready to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the victim as ad interim compensation or not as one of the condition for bail.
Today, when the case is called out, instead of filing supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the order dated 31.01.2019, which reveals that charges under Sections 354, 354A, 506, of the I.P.C. and Sections 4 / 6 / 10 / 12 of the POCSO Act have been framed against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of order dated 23.04.2019, she has taken instruction from her client and submitted that his client is not in a position to pay the aforesaid amount, but he can manage to pay Rs. 35,000/-.
Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail.
Be that as it may, I am inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamshedpur, in connection with Mango (MGM) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 2553 of 2018, subject to the following conditions:-
-2-
(i) Petitioner shall deposit Rs. 35,000/- before the trial court on the date of furnishing bail bonds, which will not prejudice the case of the petitioner during trial.
(ii) On deposition of the aforesaid amount, the trial court will issue notice to informant and her daughter Prachi Gupta and on their appearance, the trial court will release the aforesaid amount in favour of informant after proper verification, which shall be used for rehabilitation of the victim.
Let a copy of order be sent to the court below.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Sunil/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner charged under IPC and POCSO sections be admitted to bail despite inability to pay full interim compensation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Md. Sajid
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
