In a bail application under Sections 96/140(1) BNS and Section 12 POCSO, the court rejected the petitioner's request for bail, deeming the allegations serious and refraining from enlargement.
Prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 10556 of 2024
Manish Kumar, aged about 19 years, s/o Rajkumar Bazar Saroni Baxar, Mahto, R/of Village - Sahara Tola, Sundermor, P.O. P.S. - Godda (M) Dist.- Godda, Jharkhand
The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party
CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
For the Petitioner: M/s. Pankaj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : M/s. Praful Jojo, A.P.P
02/13.12.2024 Heard the Parties.
Petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Godda (T) P.S. Case No. 218/2024, registered under Sections 96/ 140 (1) of the B.N.S., Section 12 of the POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Spl. Judge, POCSO, Godda.
The petitioner is alleged to have enticed 16 years old daughter of the petitioner with the intention to marry her. Statement of the victim was recorded under section 183 of the B.N.S.S. in which he has stated that the petitioner had raped her
Regard being had to the facts and circumstance of the case and considering the nature of allegation; I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Saurabh
uploaded
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the prayer for bail by the accused in a POCSO case involving rape should be allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manish Kumar
The State of Jharkhand
Ambuj Nath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
