Dismissed¶33

Vivek Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC22 Apr 2025Cr.Rev./215/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

juvenile bail refused; rape-murder of minor girl; strong suspicion in FIR; confessional statement para-25 case diary; throttling; post-mortem asphyxia due to strangulation; bleeding from genitalia; body recovered naked from field of Nathun Singh; sections 376 and 302 IPC; Dandai P.S. Case No.85 of 2023; G.R. Case No.282 of 2024; Juvenile Justice Board Garhwa order 08.02.2024; Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2024; judgment 31.07.2024 Santosh Anand Prasad Children Court Garhwa; Cr. Rev. No. 215 of 2025 dismissed; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Justice Sanjay Prasad; 22 April 2025; trial expedited; petitioner in custody since 23.11.2023.

What did the court decide?

This Court is not inclined to enlarge the Juvenile petitioner on bail; the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner is rejected. ¶12

Vivek Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the Juvenile petitioner, arraigned in Dandai P.S Case No.85 of 2023 (G.R Case No.282 of 2024) under sections 376 and 302 IPC, should be enlarged on bail, the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court having declined bail.

¶20

Court's answer

This Court is not inclined to enlarge the Juvenile petitioner on bail; the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner is rejected.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Strong suspicion has been shown against the Juvenile petitioner in the FIR by the informant for committing the rape and causing the death of the deceased girl.

¶7

Key takeaways

The confessional statement of the petitioner recorded in para-25 of the case diary reveals that the petitioner had tried to establish physical relationship with the Victim girl (deceased) and, on her protest, is alleged to have established forcible physical relationship with her and throttled her neck.ratio¶27
The post-mortem report shows the cause of death as Asphyxia due to strangulation, with bleeding from genitalia also present; the appellate court's order further recorded that the Victim girl used to talk with the Juvenile petitioner on mobile phone.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi (Sanjay Prasad, J.), Cr. Rev. No. 215 of 2025, decided 22 April 2025: Criminal revision filed by a juvenile petitioner (aged about 17 years 8 months 14 days, in custody since 23.11.2023) challenging the judgment dated 31.07.2024 of the Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Garhwa in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2024 (which had affirmed the Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa order dated 08.02.2024) and seeking enlargement on bail in Dandai P.S Case No.85 of 2023 (G.R Case No.282 of 2024, sections 376 and 302 IPC), stands DISMISSED. The Court found strong suspicion in the FIR that the petitioner committed rape upon the deceased girl and caused her death by throttling; the body was recovered on 22.11.2023 in naked/objectionable condition from the field of one Nathun Singh; the confessional statement at para-25 of the case diary disclosed attempted physical relations, alleged forcible intercourse upon her protest, and throttling; the post-mortem recorded cause of death as 'Asphyxia due to strangulation' with bleeding from genitalia. Bail prayer rejected; both impugned orders upheld; trial directed to be expedited.

¶1

2025:JHHC:11932

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 215 of 2025

¶3

------

¶4

Vivek Kumar Singh, Aged about 17 years 08 months and 14 days, S/o Ram Badan Singh, R/o Village-Raro, P.ORaro, P.S. Dandai, District-Garhwa (Jharkhand) represented through natural guardian (Father) Ram Badan Singh, age about 56 years, S/o Bhulan Singh, R/o VillageRaro, P.O-Raro, P.S. Dandai, District-Garhwa (Jharkhand)

¶5

…… Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.The State of Jharkhand

¶8

2.Guardian of Victim-X …… Opp. Parties

¶9

-------

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶11

-----

¶12

For the petitioner : Mr. Sushil Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, APP

¶13

¶14

03/Dated:22^nd April, 2025

¶15

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 31.07.2024 passed by Sri Santosh Anand Prasad, learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum- Special Judge, Children Court, Garhwa in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2024 by which appeal has been dismissed and the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner has been rejected thereby affirming the order dated 08.02.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S Case No.85 of 2023 (G.R Case No.282 of 2024) instituted under section 376 and 302 of IPC.

¶16

As per F.I.R, the daughter of the informant was found missing in the night of 21.11.2023 at around 11.00 p.m. and her dead body was recovered on 22.11.2023 in the morning. The informant suspected that the petitioner has committed murder of the deceased girl by throttling her neck after committing rape upon her.

¶17

¶18

2025:JHHC:11932

¶19

Heard Mr. Sushil Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, learned APP for the State.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court and the learned Juvenile Justice Board are illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that only suspicion has shown against the Juvenile petitioner and no specific allegation has been levelled against him. It is submitted that after performing the last rities of the deceased girl, the FIR was lodged by the informant after great delay. It is submitted that save and except the confessional statement there is nothing against the Juvenile petitioner. It is submitted that the Juvenile petitioner is in custody since 23.11.2023 and hence the Juvenile petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that strong suspicion has been shown against the petitioner in the F.I.R by the informant. It is submitted that the petitioner has confessed his guilt which is evident from the para-25 of the case diary and hence the prayer for bail of the juvenile-petitioner may be rejected.

¶22

Perused the records of this case and considered the submission of both the sides. 7. It appears from the FIR that strong suspicion has been shown against the Juvenile petitioner by the informant for committing the rape and causing the death of the deceased girl.

¶23

It further appears that the dead body of the deceased girl was recovered in naked condition/objectionable condition from the field of one Nathun Singh.

¶24

The confessional statement of the petitioner recorded

¶25

¶26

2025:JHHC:11932

¶27

in para-25 of the case diary reveals that the petitioner had tried to establish physical relationship with the Victim girl (deceased) and thereafter on her protest, he is alleged to have established forcibly physical relationship with her and thereafter he throttled her neck.

¶28

It further reveals from the order passed by the learned Appellate Court that the Victim girl used to talk with this Juvenile petitioner on mobile phone. The cause of death is shown as Asphyxia due to strangulation in the post-mortem report of the deceased and even bleeding from genetalia was also present.

¶29

In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Juvenile petitioner on bail.

¶30

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner is rejected.

¶31

Under the circumstances, the judgment dated 31.07.2024 passed by Sri Santosh Anand Prasad, learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum- Special Judge, Children Court, Garhwa in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2024 and the order dated 08.02.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S Case No.85 of 2023 (G.R Case No.282 of 2024) are upheld.

¶32

The learned Court below is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible.

¶33

Thus, Cr. Rev. No.215 of 2025 stands dismissed.

¶34

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶35

Saket/

¶36

Vivek Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basuki Yadav Alias Basudeo Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md. Ajimuddin Alias Md.Azim Alias Lalu @ Md,Ajimuddin Azim Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shekhar Kumar Modi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ranbir Lohra Alias Ranvir Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sohit Bauri Vs the State of Jharkhand