Punilal Saw Vs State of Jharkhand

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Birni P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, registered under Section 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

¶14

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.01.2026 and there is delay of two months in filing the First Information Report. He has referred to paragraph 12 of the bail application to submit that the victim also refused to get herself medically examined. He submits that this fact would be apparent from paragraph 27 of the case-diary.

¶15

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶16

5. The learned counsel for the informant has appeared and submits that he has no objection for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶17

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State has submitted that the case-diary is not available with her to verify the statement made in paragraph 12 of the bail application. She has also submitted that delay in filing the First Information Report is explained by saying that the husband of the victim had gone to Mumbai to earn a living.

¶18

7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is delay of two months in filing the First Information Report and as per the statement made in paragraph 12 of

¶19

2026:JHHC:7581

¶20

the bail application, the victim had also refused to give consent for her medical examination and further, the informant of the case has no objection for grant of bail to the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Birni P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, on the following conditions:

¶21

(i) The learned Court shall verify the aforesaid statement of the petitioner from the case-diary that the victim had not consented for medical examination and in case such statement is found incorrect , the petitioner shall not be released on bail.

¶22

(ii) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.

¶23

(iii) The other bailor should be his close relative.

¶24

(iv) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.

¶25

(v) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he

¶26