Regular bail application under IPC Sections 366-A/376(2)(n) and Section 4 POCSO Act. Court noted discrepancies regarding the victim's age, her familiarity with the petitioner, and her travel with him without protest, and allowed bail on a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties.
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.3911 of 2024
Silendar Manjhi @ Sandeep aged about 24 years son of Chandar Manjhi resident of Gond Toli Village Banjogra, P.O. and P.S. Jaldega, District Simdega. ..... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
-----For the Petitioner : Mrs. Seema Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P. --------
06/13.08.2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for
the State.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Rohit
-2-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a POCSO case given doubts about the victim's age and her conduct.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Silendar Manjhi @ Sandeep
The State of Jharkhand
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
