Petitioner challenged refusal of bail in a POCSO andsexual offence case. Court rejected bail application noting victim statement indicates serious crime with co-accused who raped victim, unlike the co-accused granted bail.
Petitioner denied bail; petition for granting regular bail rejected. Case remains in judicial custody.
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. 6292 of 2019
Gulam Ansari …Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ...Opp. Party
CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : - Mr. Nitish Kumar Sahani, Advocate For the State :- Mrs. Laxmi Murmu, Advocate
04/09.08.2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 34, 376(D) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6/12 of POCSO Act in connection with Spl. POCSO Case no. 17 of 2019, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Bokaro.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Co-accused Rajak Ansari @ Rejak Ansari has already been granted regular bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.03.2019 passed in B.A. No. 1646 of 2019. As such, the petitioner, who is in judicial custody since 31.12.2018, may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for bail submits that the statement of victim girl has been recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she has clearly stated that after being kidnapped, she was taken away somewhere and when she got her consciousness back, she found herself in a room in necked condition and saw that the petitioner and co-accused Sarfaraj Ansari were present there. The said co-accused persons also committed rape upon her. Thus, the case of co-accused Rajak Ansari @ Rejak Ansari cannot be equated to that of the petitioner. As such, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his bail application is hereby rejected.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an accused in the Spl. POCSO Case, is entitled to regular bail given the co-accused Rajak Ansari was granted bail.
Whether the petitioner is falsely implicated and has been wrongly in judicial custody.
Gulam Ansari
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
