Jharkhand High Court
Srikant Mandal @ Shrikanta Mondal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No.299 of 2022
---------
Srikant Mandal @ Shrikanta Mondal
... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Smt. Sunita Gorain ... Opposite Parties
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P.
For the Opp. Party No.2 : Mr. L.C.N. Roy, Adv.
---------
Order No.05 Dated 15th July, 2022
I.A No.4046 of 2022
The present Interlocutory Application being I.A No.4046 of
2022 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail
during pendency of the present Criminal Revision.
2. The Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of
the petitioner by challenging the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Criminal Appeal No.14 of
2021 by which, the learned Principal Sessions Judge has allowed the
said Criminal Appeal by setting-aside the judgment dated
23.09.2021 passed by Sri Arvind Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Class, Jamtara in connection with Jamtara P.S. Case No.97 of 2016
arising out of G.R No.854 of 2016, corresponding to T.R No.630 of
2021 by which, the petitioner was acquitted by the learned Trial
Court from the charges under Section 354/345(B)/298 of the I.P.C.
However, the learned Appellate Court has convicted the petitioner
for the offence under Section 354 of the I.P.C and has sentenced him
to undergo for Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 02 (two) years
and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the
petitioner has further been directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment
for a period of three months.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner is innocent. It is submitted that the learned Appellate
Court has not appreciated the evidence made on behalf of the
petitioner. It is further submitted that the learned Appellate Court
has merely relied upon the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.3 and P.W.5 who
are the interested witnesses. It is further submitted that the petitioner
is in custody since 06.04.2022 and hence, he may be enlarged on
bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed
the bail.
5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has also has
opposed the bail and has submitted that complainant has fully
supported her case against this petitioner for outraging her modesty
and she has remained intact even during her cross-examination also.
It is further submitted that P.W.1 and P.W.3 are also the eye-witness
of occurrence, who have supported the allegation against this
petitioner.
6. Perused the Lower Court Records and Interlocutory
Application No.4046 of 2022 and considered the submissions on
behalf of both the parties.
7. It transpires that for the date of occurrence, which was said to
have taken place on 17.09.2016, a Complaint Case was filed on
19.09.2016 by the Informant which was sent for investigation under
Section 156(3) giving rise to Jamtara P.S. Case No.97 of 2016
arising out of G.R No.854 of 2016, corresponding to T.R No.630 of
2021 and the F.I.R was lodged on 01.10.2016.
8. It would further appear that although P.W.1 namely, Priya
Gorain & P.W.3 namely, Tapan Gorai have claimed to be the eye-
witness of the occurrence. However, the presence of P.W.1 and
P.W.3 have not been mentioned in the Complaint Petition on
17.09.2016.
9. Considering the period of custody of the petitioner and on the
facts and in the circumstances of this case during pendency of this
Criminal Revision, the petitioner namely, Srikant Mandal @ Shrikanta
Mondal, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of Mr. Arvind Kumar, Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamtara or his successor court in connection
with Jamtara P.S. Case No.97 of 2016 arising out of G.R No.854 of
2016, corresponding to T.R No.630 of 2021, subject to the condition
that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner.
10. Accordingly, I.A. No. 4046 of 2022 stands allowed and is
accordingly disposed of.
Criminal Revision No.299 of 2022
11. Learned counsel for the parties have jointly submitted that the
matter may be sent to DLSA, Jamtara for proper mediation between both
the sides.
12. Under the circumstances, let the case be referred to District
Legal Service Authority, Jamtara.
13. It will be desirable that both the parties (i.e, the petitioner and
the Opposite Party No.2) shall appear before the District Legal
Service Authority, Jamtara on 04th August, 2022
14. The Secretary, D.L.S.A, Jamtara will appoint a Mediator for
an amicable settlement of disputes between both the sides.
15. The Secretary, DLSA, Jamtara is directed to submit his report
before this Court on or before 19th September, 2022.
16. Accordingly, put up this case on 26th September, 2022.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Raja/-
