Jharkhand High Court
Prasant Tripathi @ Prashant ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.8945 of 2021
------
Prasant Tripathi @ Prashant Triathi
.... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Advocate
: Mr. Azam, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 06.12.2021
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects
pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks from the date of this
order.
In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the
present.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S.
Case No. 264 of 2020 instituted under Sections 342, 366-A, 376(2)(i) of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 4 and 21(A) of POCSO Act, the petitioner has
moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
allegation against the petitioner is that the minor victim girl was kept in the
hotel of the petitioner for two days by the co-accused person. It is submitted
that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the
co-accused-Ujjawal Singh allegedly kept the minor victim girl in the hotel,
who has since been acquitted in Special POCSO Case No.05 of 2021 vide
judgment dated 06.04.2021 passed by Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act,
Palamau at Daltonganj, arising out of this case itself, wherein the P.W.5-the
minor victim girl herself categorically stated that she befriended the co-
accused person-Ujjawal Singh through the social media for last one year,
she used to chat with the co-accused person-Ujjawal Singh and she has on
several occasions to met with the co-accused person-Ujjawal Singh and she
could not recall her date of birth and she further stated that no occurrence
has taken place and she was declared hostile. It is then submitted that
similarly, the informant who has been examined as P.W.-1 in the trial of the
co-accused person-Ujjawal Singh has not taken the name of the petitioner
who is the owner of the hotel and further told that the minor victim girl
went to the hotel for a party. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready
and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is
submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and
circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in
the Court within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or
surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge POCSO-cum-
Children Court, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Daltonganj Town
P.S. Case No. 264 of 2020 with the condition that he will co-operate with
the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as
and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy
of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his
mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Pappu/
