Jharkhand High Court
Aman Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 3415 of 2021
------
1. Aman Kumar
2. Sunita Devi ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sidhant Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. A.P. Topno, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.02 Dated- 24.06.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing.
Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to
remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within
two weeks after the lockdown period is over.
In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for
the petitioners, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are
ignored for the present.
Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this
Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Ichak P.S. Case No.163 of 2020 (Spl. POCSO Case No.75 of 2020)
registered under sections 366A of the Indian Penal Code and under
Section 4/6 of Special POCSO Act.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners aided the
co-accused-Kabir Singh Rajput @ Guddu Kumar by enticing away
the victim girl. It is further submitted that the allegations against
the petitioners are all false and the statement of the victim has been
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., a copy of the certified copy of
which is annexed at page no.15-16 of the brief (Annexure-2),
wherein the victim has not stated anything against the petitioners
rather she has stated that she went voluntarily with the co-accused
Kabir Singh Rajput @ Guddu Kumar and solemnized marriage
with him. It is then submitted that the matter has been
compromised between the parties and a joint compromise petition
has been filed in the court of Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, a copy of
the certified copy of which is annexed as Annxure-3 of the brief
and also the co-accused- Kabir Singh Rajput @ Guddu Kumar has
been acquitted after trial in Spl. POCSO Case No.75 of 2020 vide
Judgment dated 08.03.2021. It is next submitted that the petitioners
have no knowledge as to why the co-accused person was taking
their car. It is then submitted that the petitioners are ready and
willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is
submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory
bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as
discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the
above named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of
six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned A.S.J.-I-cum-Spl. Judge, POCSO Act cases,
Hazaribagh, in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.163 of 2020
(Spl. POCSO Case No.75 of 2020) with the condition that the
petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and
appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by
him and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their
Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they
will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the
case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr.
P.C.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu/Gunjan-
