RANCHI, India, April 6 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on March 6:
Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest in connection with Lohardaga (Mahila) P.S. Case No.15 of 2024 instituted under Sections 376, 333, 324, 498A, 313 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 6 of POCSO Act, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners treated the informant with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry and caused miscarriage of her child in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person Arman Ansari. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the allegation of commission of repeated rape is upon Arman ; who is not the petitioner before this Court. It is next submitted that the police after investigation of the case did not send up the petitioners for trial because of lack of evidence against them but the learned Additional Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Lohardaga (Mahila) P.S. Case No.15 of 2024 instituted under Sections 376, 333, 324, 498A, 313 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 6 of POCSO Act, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners treated the informant with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry and caused miscarriage of her child in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person Arman Ansari. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the allegation of commission of repeated rape is upon Arman ; who is not the petitioner before this Court. It is next submitted that the police after investigation of the case did not send up the petitioners for trial because of lack of evidence against them but the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Lohardaga differing with the Final Form has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 313, 323, 506, 498A and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 6 of POCSO Act against the petitioners as well; without taking the aid of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code or any other similar provision of law. It is next submitted that there is no allegation of commission of rape upon the victim by any of the petitioners. It is next submitted that there is an inordinate delay of 9 years in lodging the FIR. So far as the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act is concerned, it is submitted that the victim is a major lady of 22 years as on the date of the lodging of the FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Lohardaga in connection with Lohardaga (Mahila) P.S. Case No.15 of 2024 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
