Maliya Bedia v. the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)

B.A .No. 6281 of 2022

Maliya Bedia @ Maliya Bediya … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

---

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

------For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Pandey , Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad , APP -------- Order No. 04 /Dated: 09th September, 2022

Heard Mr. Rahul Pandey , the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satish Prasad, the learned APP for the State.

Mr. Rahul Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR and he is absolutely innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. The learned counsel for the petitioner has read out from the restatement version of the informant as given in paragraph no. 9 of the case diary and pointed out that this is reiteration of the allegation in the FIR regarding solemnization of marriage and counsel submits that no sanha was lodged. It is then submitted that in para 44 of the Case diary one Suresh Bedia made statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. which is basically reiteration of the allegations. However, counsel says that later on this Suresh Bedia in his deposition as a witness while affirming the allegation in the examination-in-chief , in his cross examination clearly stated that police had arrested and tortured him and stated that his statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has been taken under threat. Counsel further says that by such admission of Suresh Bedia the case against the petitioner has collapsed. The counsel further submitted that thereafter the charge sheet has been submitted and section 376 of the IPC has been added however, there is no medical evidence whatsoever supporting such allegation and no spermatozoa was indicated in the medical report. Counsel further says that suspicion should not take place of clear facts and evidence.