Baby Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

This Criminal Appeal (SJ) has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the order dated 06.01.2025 passed by Kusum Kumari, learned Addl. Session Judge-I-cum Special Judge, FTC, Ramgarh in A.B.P. No.393/2024 arising out of SC/ST P.S. Case No.05 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 376,504,506/34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act by which the prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected.

¶13

As per FIR, one Aman Kumar Jaiswal i.e. the son of the appellant, is alleged to have established physical relationship several times with the Informant on the pretext of marriage from 2018 till November 2022. Thereafter, on 04.12.2022, when the Informant along with her family members went to the home of appellant then they learnt that the son of the appellant has been ousted from the house and when she made enquiry from mother Baby Devi i.e. the appellant then she was abused by her in the name of her caste and thrashed on the ground.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

¶16

¶17

2025:JHHC:23648

¶18

impugned order passed by the learned Court below is illegal, and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence as the occurrence is not in the public view. It is submitted that the appellant is the mother of co-accused Aman Kumar Jaiswal who is alleged to have established physical relationship with the Informant on pretext of marriage. It is submitted that the said Aman Kumar Jaiswal is in jail since January 2025. It is submitted that save and except allegations of abusing and assaulting the Informant in the name of her caste, there is no specific allegation against the appellant and the appellant is ready to co-operate with the Investigating Officer during the Trial and hence appellant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the appellant is mother of co-accused Aman Kumar Jaiswal and she had not agreed for the marriage between the Informant and the co-accused Aman Kumar. It is submitted that the Informant during subsequent statement at paragraph 4 of Case Diary along with two other witnesses namely Rajni Devi at Para 5 and Sanita Devi at Para-6 have stated that the appellant has abused the Informant in the name of her caste. It is submitted that as the appellant had abused the informant in the name of her caste and hence her prayer for anticipatory bail may be rejected.

¶20

Perused the FIR and Case Diary and considered the submissions of both the sides. 7. It appears that in the light of the order dated 27.03.2025 the notice directed to be been served upon the informant with registered cover with A/D, the learned APP was also directed to serve a notice of this appeal upon the victim girl. However, when the case is called out, none appears on behalf of the Informant on 25.06.2025 and 16.07.2025 and even today i.e. on 11.08.2025.

¶21

¶22

2025:JHHC:23648

¶23

It also appears from the Counter Affidavit filed by the learned State counsel that notice has been served upon the Informant on 22.04.2025 and the photocopy of her Aadhaar card has also been enclosed

¶24

It appears that the appellant is the mother of the co-accused Aman Kumar who is said to have established physical relationship several times with the Informant on the pretext of marriage.

¶25

It also reveals that the Informant is a major girl aged around 23 years on the date of lodging the FIR. 11. It appears that the appellant is a lady and mother of the co-accused Aman Kumar Jaiswal 12. Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant namely Baby Devi, is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six (06) weeks from today, and in the event of her arrest or surrender, the appellant is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/(Rs.Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Kusum Kumari, learned Addl. Session Judge-Icum Special Judge, FTC, Ramgarh in A.B.P. No.393/2024 arising out of SC/ST P.S. Case No.05 of 2023 or her Successor Court.

¶26

Accordingly, the impugned dated 06.01.2025 passed by Kusum Kumari, learned Addl. Session Judge-I-cum Special Judge, FTC, Ramgarh in A.B.P. No.393/2024 arising out of SC/ST Case No.05 of 2023 is set aside.

¶27

Thus, this Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.162 of 2025 is allowed.

¶28

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶29

Nishant/-

¶30

Baby Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baby Devi 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

Jaydeo Ray Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vivek Yadav Alias Vivek Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surendra Prasad Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The S P Cbi Acb Ranchi And Ors.

Jinendra Kumar Jain Alias Jainandra Kr.Jain Vs State of Jharkhand through CBI

Kyamuddin Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prahlad Chandra Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand