Allowed

Jeet Lal Soren v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Dec 2020B.A./9474/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Special POCSO case, the Jharkhand High Court enlarged the petitioner on bail after accepting his undertaking to remove stamp defects and his explanation that the victim eloped voluntarily. The court directed release on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount and undertaking to cooperate with trial.

Jeet Lal Soren Vs the State of Jharkhand — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9474 of 2020

¶2

Jeet Lal Soren … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------

¶3

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. A. Singh, Addl. P.P. ------

¶4

Order No.02 Dated- 09.12.2020

¶5

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

¶7

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶8

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No.40 of 2020 arising out of Petarbar P.S. Case No.16 of 2020 (G.R. No.146 of 2020) registered under sections 363/366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of POCSO Act.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has enticed away the victim girl with an intention to marry her. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and drawing attention of this Court to the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which is annexed as Annexure-3 at page nos.24-27 of the brief, it is submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of enticing away the victim rather the victim has stated that out of her own volition, the victim has eloped with the petitioner who. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.03.2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 1 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the

¶10

trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶11

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1^st -cum-Special Judge, Bokaro, in connection with Special POCSO Case No.40 of 2020 arising out of Petarbar P.S. Case No.16 of 2020 (G.R. No.146 of 2020) with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case.

¶13

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶14

Sonu-Gunjan/

Jeet Lal Soren v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeet Lal Soren 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

Abhishek Kumar Chouhan Alias Abhishek Chouhan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lalan Kumar Sah Alias Lalan Kr Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rausan Nayak Alias Raushan Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sonu Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pintu Kumar Shah Alias Pintu Kumar Khan Alias Wasim Akram Khan Alias Wasim Khan Alias Pintu Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arif Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand