RANCHI, India, Jan. 14 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Dec. 15:

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of regular bail in connection with SC/ST Case No. 91 of 2024 arising out of Patan P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 registered for offences under Sections 376(1), 341, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, whereby the learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj has dismissed the Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 1468 of 2025.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.04.2024, the appellant who is aged about 55 years, has forcibly committed rape upon the mentally retarded daughter of the informant by gagging her with a piece of cloth and tying her hands and on the next day, when the informant asked the appellant for committing the said occurrence, then the appellant admitted that he has committed rape upon her daughter and he is not afraid of anyone and thereafter, son of appellant called the informant and threatened and abused her in the name of caste.

3. Heard Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, learned Addl.P.P. for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence in this case. It is submitted that the appellant has voluntarily surrendered before the learned Court below and is languishing in custody since 30.07.2024. It is further submitted that the appellant moved before this Court in Cr. A (S.J.) No. 642 of 2024 which was dismissed vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed by this Court.

5. It is next submitted that as a matter of fact, the informant and the victim themselves had already been examined as prosecution witness i.e, P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 respectively in the instant case and both have been declared hostile by the prosecution.

6. It is submitted that the medical examination report of the victim lady does not corroborate with the allegations as alleged in the First Information Report and no sign of any sexual assault or any other injury either external or internal was found by the doctor. It is submitted that despite the above, the learned Court below has rejected the regular bail of the appellant.

7. On the other hand, learned Addl. P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the prayer for the regular bail of the appellant was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 642 of 2024. It is submitted that the appellant has committed rape upon the victim lady who is mentally retarded by tying her hands and gagging her mouth with a piece of cloth. Hence, even if the victim girl has been declared hostile, the appellant may not be released on bail at this stage, hence, the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected.

8. Perused the FIR, the impugned order and peruse the record of this case.

9. It appears that the earlier prayer for bail of the appellant was already rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 642 of 2024 (Annexure-2).

10. It appears that the appellant has renewed the prayer for bail of the appellant, on the ground that the victim girl and her mother have been declared hostile during the trial.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x7cRZYsW8rSZrl9MWlapgZSyP4wUiVR8HFTI7W9G6I%2Bm&caseno=Cr.A(SJ)/741/2025&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010283612025&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.