Allowed

Badal Kumar Alias Badal Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Dec 2020B.A./9618/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand enlarged the petitioner on bail in a Special POCSO case. The court accepted the petitioner's undertaking to remove stamp defects after the lockdown and to cooperate with the trial without disturbing the victim, granting bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, undertaking to remove stamp defects later and not to disturb the victim.

Badal Kumar Alias Badal Munda Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9618 of 2020

¶2

Badal Kumar @ Badal Munda … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶3

------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Addl. P.P.

¶5

------

¶6

Order No.02 Dated- 11.12.2020

¶7

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No.316 of 2019 (Special POCSO Case No.03 of 2020) registered under sections 341/323/354/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of POCSO Act.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has outraged the modesty of a minor girl. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.11.2019 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and also undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the victim or her family members in any manner nor he will go to or near the house of the victim. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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-I, Ramgarh, in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No.316 of 2019 (Special POCSO Case No.03 of 2020) with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the victim or her family members in any manner nor he will go to or near the house of the victim.

¶15

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶16

Sonu-Gunjan/

Badal Kumar Alias Badal Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badal Kumar Alias Badal Munda 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

Krishna Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vishnu Munda Alias Surju Alias Sukhram Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Panchu Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jahangir Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Motahar Sk Alias Mutahar Sk Alias Musahar Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand