Ashish Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 2952 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      Cr. Rev. No. 380 of 2023
        Ashish Oraon                       ...   ...Petitioner
                        Versus
        The State of Jharkhand.            ...   ...Opp. Party
                              ---------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

For the Petitioner : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, A.P.P.

---------

04/ 17.08.2023 This Cr. Revision has been preferred on behalf of

petitioner-Ashish Oraon against the order dated 05.01.2023

whereby the learned Special Judge (Children Court), Gumla in

Cr. Appeal No. 60 of 2022 had dismissed the appeal and

affirmed the order dated 14.09.2022 passed by the learned

J.J.Board, Gumla in Misc. Cr. Application No. 610 of 2022,

arising out of Bisunpur P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022, registered

under Section 376 (DA) of I.P.C., 1860 and under Sections 4, 6

& 8 of POCSO Act whereby the Bail Petition of the juvenile was

rejected.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted

that the J.J.Board has rejected the Bail Application of the

juvenile on the ground that if released on bail he would expose

to physical danger and the learned Appellate Court also

dismissed the appeal affirming the order passed by the

J.J.Board. Neither J.J.Board nor the Appellate Court had taken

into consideration the Social Investigation Report while there is

nothing against the juvenile in the Social Investigation Report.

The Appellate Court has taken into consideration the gravity of

the offence.

3. The learned A.P.P. opposed the contentions made by

the learned Counsel for the petitioner and contended that the

prosecution case is corroborated with the statement of victim

under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. though she did not support the

same during examination before the J.J.Board. The allegation

made is serious in nature and accordingly contended not to

interfere in the impugned order passed by the J.J.Board and

the Appellate Court as well.

4. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are that the victim

gave the written information with the Police Station concerned

with these allegations that on 12.03.2022 at 6 O'clock of

evening she along with her friend, mother, father and uncle had

gone to attend the marriage celebration. She came back from

there along with her friend and uncle at 9 O'clock and went to

another marriage celebration. While she was coming back from

there at 11:30 O'clock the accused persons named in the F.I.R.

intercepted them. Her friend managed to flee away on account

of fear while she was dragged by the accused persons. Her uncle

resisted but the accused persons also assaulted him. Her uncle

also managed to flee away and came again with one Hiralal

Oraon. Both were assaulted by the accused persons and were

made to flee away from there. The accused persons took her at

the isolated place. First of all Sinu Munda raped her. Thereafter

Sujit Oraon and Bindeshwar Oraon also raped her. Ultimately

all the accused persons had committed rape upon her.

5. It is also further submitted that though the victim

corroborated the prosecution story under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

but the trial in this case has commenced before the J.J.Board

wherein Hari Bhagat was examined as P.W.5 and the victim was

examined as P.W.4. Their deposition statements have been

made Annexure No. 4 series of the petition. Both the witnesses

have not corroborated the prosecution story.

6. From the perusal of the order passed by the

J.J.Board which was affirmed by the Appellate Court, it is found

that the bail was rejected taking into consideration the offence

alleged was heinous in nature and the release on bail would

defeat the ends of justice.

7. It is also the settled law that while considering the bail

application of the juvenile the nature of the offence or gravity of

the offence cannot be the factor to reject the bail application.

There are certain provisions which are laid down in Section 12

of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The

certain guidelines are to be observed by the court while

disposing the bail application of the juvenile.

8. In para 8 of the impugned Judgment, it is stated that

Social Investigation Report was called for and there is nothing

to show that the appellant would mingle with anti-social

elements rather it is stated that the appellant has the

companion of his age group. The neighbourhood report also

suggests that no complaint was against the juvenile and his

family. The Probation Officer also recommended that the

juvenile can be brought to main stream after study. This Social

Investigation Report was not taken into consideration by the

Appellate Court while affirming the order of the J.J.Board rather

rejected the bail keeping in view the nature of the offence. P.W.

5 Hari Bhagat, who is uncle of the victim, was also declared

hostile before the J.J.Board during trial and he was cross-

examined by the prosecution and he denied the statement given

to the I.O. during investigation. P.W.4 the victim was also

examined and she also declared hostile. This witness in cross-

examination on behalf of defence has stated that the written

information was given by her. She neither read the same nor

was read over to her. She gave the statement before the

Magistrate but she did not recollect the same. She also did not

identify the accused persons and denied the occurrence.

9. In view of testimony of victim and her uncle who were

examined before the trial court and also taking into

consideration the Social Investigation Report where there is

nothing adverse against the juvenile, the impugned order

passed by the Appellate Court which has affirmed the order

passed by J.J.Board needs interference.

10. Accordingly, this Cr. Revision is hereby allowed. The

impugned order passed by the J.J.Board and the Appellate

Court are set aside.

11. In consequence thereof, the child in conflict with law

is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) and two sureties

of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Principal

Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla in connection with

Bisunpur P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.

80 of 2022 which are to be furnished on behalf of the guardian

of the child in conflict with law.

12. The guardian of the child is also directed to give an

undertaking that he would keep the vigil eye on the C.C.L. and

would control him from being in association with the known

criminals.

(Subhash Chand, J.) P.K.S.