Sunil Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Sept 2024B.A./5387/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand HC bail allowance (02-09-2024, Subhash Chand, J.) for 20-year-old accused in POCSO Case No.34 of 2024 (Sonahatu (Rahe) P.S. Case No.02 of 2024), charges Ss. 376/506 IPC and Ss. 4/6 POCSO Act 2012; victim aged 16; S.164 CrPC statement records physical relations; doctor opined physical relations cannot be ruled out; accused shown aged 18-19 (adolescent); bail bond Rs. 20,000 with two like sureties; matter pending before Special Judge POCSO, Ranchi.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case. ¶¶12

Sunil Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5387 of 2024

¶2

Sunil Munda, aged about 20 years, S/o Narottam Munda, resident of Village Katiyadih, P.O. Rahe, P.S. Sonahatu (Rahe OP), District Ranchi

¶3

…... Petitioner

¶4

Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶5

¶6

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶7

------For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Ravidas, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, APP -------- Order No.07 /Dated: 2^nd September, 2024

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶9

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed petitioner with prayer to release on bail in connection with POCSO Case No.34 of 2024 arising out of Sonahatu (Rahe) P.S. Case No.02 of 2024, registered under sections 376/ 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/ 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-IV-cum- Special Judge POCSO at Ranchi.

¶10

The FIR of this case was lodged by the father of the victim with these allegations that his 16 years old minor daughter was alone at the house. He had gone to graze the goat and his wife had also gone to bring the wood from jungle, when they came back his house, found his daughter missing and, on search being made, he found that his daughter was in the house of Sunil Munda, the petitioner herein. She along with family member reached to the house of Sunil Munda and recovered his daughter and it was told by his daughter that Sunil Munda had raped her.

¶11

The statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., in which, she stated that on the fateful day, she being alone called her friend Sunil Munda over his mobile phone and went to his house and also established physical relation with him many times. In medical examination report, the doctor has opined that physical relations cannot be ruled out. The petitioner is also shown of age 18-19 years old i.e. adolescent.

¶12

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby allowed. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.

¶13

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶14

Madhav/-

Sunil Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Sabir Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nihal Singh Parihar Alias Banti Mukhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rashid Ali Alias Rashi Hawar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hablu Mandal Alias Ghavalu Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kamlesh Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Hembrom Alias Sideshwar Hembrom Vs the State of Jharkhand