Jharkhand High Court
Shiva Kumar Purty @ Shiv Kr. Purty ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 400 of 2022
....
Shiva Kumar Purty @ Shiv Kr. Purty represented through his father
natural guardian Sinu Purty @ Sinu Ram Purty
...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opp. Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. J. N. Upadhayay, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A. P. P.
......
06/03.08.2022 The present Criminal Revision No. 400 of 2022 has been
filed by the petitioner under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 challenging the order dated
04.03.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan
in Criminal Appeal (Bail) No. 04 of 2022 whereby learned Sessions
Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan has rejected the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and affirmed the order dated 27.01.2022 passed by the
Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Seraikella in MCRA No.
154 of 2022 in connection with POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019(S)
corresponding to R.I.T. P. S. Case No. 93 of 2019 for the offence under
Section 376 of the Indian Penal code and under Section 4/6 of the
POCSO Act, by which prayer for bail of the juvenile-petitioner was
rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for
the State.
3. As per the FIR, the accused persons including this juvenile-
petitioner is alleged to have committed gang rape upon the victim girl.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is a juvenile and the allegation of committing rape to the
victim girl is not correct. It is submitted that the other co-accused
namely Sanjay Lamay and Sukra Kalindi @ Sukru have already been
acquitted vide judgment dated 08.03.2022 passed in POCSO Case No.
51 of 2019 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella-
Kharsawan. It is further submitted that another co-accused namely
Badal Purty @ Badal Poorti has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.06.2022 in Criminal Revision
No. 433 of 2022. It is submitted that the juvenile-petitioner is in
custody since August, 2019 and as such, he is in custody for around
three (3) years and as such, he may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed
the prayer for bail and has submitted that this juvenile petitioner
alongwith other accused persons has committed gang rape upon the
victim girl and as such, prayer for bail of the petitioner is fit to be
rejected.
6. Perused the Lower Court Records and Social Investigation
Report and the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
and the judgment passed by the learned Court below and considered
the submission of both the sides.
7. It transpires from the FIR that the juvenile-petitioner along
with other accused persons is alleged to have committed gang rape
upon the victim girl. However, it also transpires that the other two co-
accused namely Sanjay Lamay and Sukra Kalindi @ Sukru have
already been acquitted vide judgment dated 08.03.2022 passed in
POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019 by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-II, Seraikella-Kharsawan. It also transpires that another co-
accused namely Badal Purty @ Badal Poorti has been granted bail by
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.06.2022 in
Criminal Revision No. 433 of 2022.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the fact that one of the co-accused has been granted
bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and two of the accused
have already been acquitted by the learned Court below, the juvenile
petitioner Shiva Kumar Purty @ Shiv Kr. Purty is directed to be
released on bail in favour of his natural guardian/father namely Sinu
Purty @ Sinu Ram Purty on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,
Seraikella in connection with POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019(S)
corresponding to R.I.T. P. S. Case No. 93 of 2019 subject to the
condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the juvenile
petitioner and the juvenile petitioner will be handed over in the custody
of his natural guardian/ father and father and natural guardian of
juvenile-petitioner will file an Undertaking that he will take proper care
of the juvenile-petitioner and shall give an Undertaking that juvenile-
petitioner shall not commit such type of crime in future again and
father of the juvenile- petitioner will submit self attested copy of his
Aadhar Card and will also submit his mobile number before the
learned Court below, which he will always keep active and will not
change it, during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of
the Court and shall produce the juvenile-petitioner as and when
required.
09. Therefore, in view of the above, the order dated 04.03.2022
passed by learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Criminal
Appeal (Bail) No. 04 of 2022 and the order dated 27.01.2022 passed by
the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Seraikella in MCRA
No. 154 of 2022 in connection with POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019(S)
corresponding to R.I.T. P. S. Case No. 93 of 2019 are set aside.
10. Thus, the Criminal Revision No. 400 of 2022 stands allowed
and disposed of.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
