Allowed

Ram Swaroop Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 May 2019Cr.A(SJ)/140/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed an appeal seeking anticipatory bail. It set aside the Sessions Judge's order rejecting the bail application and directed the release of appellants on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties, if the appellants surrender within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of 20th December 2018 set aside; appellants directed to be released on bail of Rs. 20,000/- each with two sureties upon surrender within four weeks.

Ram Swaroop Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.140 of 2019

¶2

¶3

Ram Swarup Singh @ Ram Swaroop Singh. 2. Mamta Devi. .......... Appellant. -Versus1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Laxmi Kumari. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----For the Appellants : Mr. B. K. Dubey, Advocate For the State : APP ----- Order No.05 Date: 09.05.2019

¶4

The present appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 20^th December, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra in A.B.P. No.769 of 2018 in connection with Mayurhand P.S. Case No.12 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No.271 of 2015, arising out of POCSO Case No.14 of 2015, under Sections 307 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code; Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; and Section 21(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, whereby the appellants’ prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

¶5

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra while passing the judgment of conviction dated 11^th September, 2018 against co-accused Rupesh Kumar Singh in POCSO Case No.14 of 2015, erroneously issued notice to the appellants under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for facing trial under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 21(1) of the POCSO Act as well as Sections 307 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code. The order dated 11^th September, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judgde-I, Chatra issuing notice to the appellants by invoking the provision of Section 319 Cr.P.C. is contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in (2014)3 SCC 92 , as the said power was not vested with the Additional Sessions Judge after pronouncement of the judgment of conviction against co-accused Rupesh Kumar Singh in POCSO Case No.14 of 2015. Thus, the impugned order dated 20^th December, 2018

¶6

-2-

¶7

passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra in A.B.P. No.769 of 2018 rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the appellants may be set aside and the appellants may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶8

No one appears on behalf of the respondent no.2 despite valid service of notice upon her.

¶9

Learned APP appears on behalf of the respondent-State of Jharkhand and opposes the appellants’ prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials available record, I am inclined to enlarge the appellants on anticipatory bail. As such, the impugned order dated 20^th December, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra in A.B.P. No.769 of 2018 is set aside.

¶11

Accordingly, the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks from today, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand), each, with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra in connection with Mayurhand P.S. Case No.12 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No.271 of 2015, arising out of POCSO Case No.14 of 2015.

¶12

The present appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

¶13

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶14

Sanjay/

Ram Swaroop Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Swaroop Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivekanand Singh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Sarwar Khan Vs State of Jharkhand

Sunil Kumar Singh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ajay Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nageshwar Prasad Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amanuddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand