Dismissed

Niranjan Kumar Mehta Alias Lalu Kumar Mehta v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Aug 2022A.B.A./3920/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a rape case under the IPC and POCSO Act involving a minor victim. The court cited the gravity of the offence, specific allegations, corroborative statements, and the victim's positive pregnancy test as reasons for denying bail despite the petitioner's claim of innocence.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; Application disposed of.

Niranjan Kumar Mehta Alias Lalu Kumar Mehta… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3920 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

Niranjan Kumar Mehta @ Lalu Kumar Mehta @ Lalu Kumar .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶6

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, Adv.

¶7

------

¶8

Order No.04 Dated- 04.08.2022

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Leshliganj P.S. Case No. 127 of 2021 instituted under Sections 376, 511, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶11

It is alleged that on 31.12.2021 at about 12:00 hours, the informant-minor victim girl went outside to collect firewood, in the meantime, petitioner along with other co-accused persons came near her and started teasing and put off her lower cloths and outraged her modesty.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case due to village politics. It is next submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that no injury has been found on the body part of the victim girl and the age of victim girl has not been assessed in the medical report, hence, it cannot be said that victim was minor at the time of alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties outside of this Court and informant does not want to contest the case. In case of his arrest at the hands of police, prestige and reputation of the petitioner shall be ruined. It is further submitted that petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and will not indulge in tampering with prosecution evidence and will abide by all terms and conditions imposed by this Court in the matter of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State being assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the minor victim girl and outraging her modesty. It is further submitted that the statement of victim girl recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, corroborates the case of prosecution. It is further submitted that the medical report of the victim girl shows that the pregnancy of the victim girl is found positive. In view of gravity of offence, and severity of punishment, petitioner may not be extended privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as stated above, gravity of offence and severity of punishment and also in view of the materials available on record showing involvement of petitioner in commission of rape upon the minor victim girl, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

¶15

I.A. No.5779 of 2022 is disposed of, accordingly.

¶16

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶17

Pappu/

Niranjan Kumar Mehta Alias Lalu Kumar Mehta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Kumar Mehta Alias Lalu Kumar Mehta 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

Tahir Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Saurabh Mahato Alias Saurav Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilvar Mia Alias Dilawar Miya Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Adnan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Etwa Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajaj Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand