Jharkhand High Court
Madan Das vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 February, 2023
1 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 258 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 258 of 2022
------
Madan Das ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
--------
For the Appellant : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mrs. Nihala Sharmin, Spl.P.P.
--------
Order No. 08: Dated: 24 February, 2023
th
Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
I.A. No. 536 of 2023
It is submitted on behalf of the appellant the I.A. No. 536 of
2023 has been field by the appellant with a prayer to enlarge the
appellant on bail after suspending the execution of order of
sentence. It has been pointed out that this court has already
admitted this appeal which has been preferred against the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.01.22 and 04.02.22
respectively passed in Special POCSO Case No. 13/2017 by ld.Addl.
Sessions Judge-I-Cum -Special Judge (POCSO Act), Koderma,
arising out of Jainagar P.S. Case No. 02/17, registered U/SS 376/34
of I.P.C. and section 4/8 of POCSO Act whereby, the appellant has
been held guilty U/SS 354/448/451 of I.P.C. and U/S 8 of the
POCSO Act, and thereby convicted under the aforesaid sections and
he was sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years, with a fine of Rs.
5,000/- U/S 8 of POCSO Act, and in default of payment S.I. for 06
(six) months, R.l. for 3 years, with a fine of Rs. 3,000/- U/S 354 of
I.P.C., and in default of payment of fine S.I. for 06 (six) months, R.I.
for 01 (one) year with a fine of Rs. 500/- U/S 448 of I.P.C. and in
default of payment of fine of S.I. for one month, R.I. for 01 (one) year
and 06 (six) month with a fine of Rs. 2500/-, U/S 451 of I.P.C. and in
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 258 of 2022
default of payment of fine S.I. for 03 (three) months.
It has been pointed out that there are major discrepancies in
the testimonies of the witnesses examined on behalf of the
prosecution and in fact no offence u./s 8 of POCSO act is made out
as evident form the major discrepancies of testimonies of P.W. 4 and
P.W. 1 one side and P.W. 4 and P.W. 5 on the other side. It has been
pointed out that taking the deposition of aforesaid witnesses in
totality including P.W. 1, P.W. 4 and P.W. 5 it is found that there has
been a landed property dispute for the use of the road/passage
between them and the possibility of false implication cannot be
ruled out. Further, it has been submitted that P.W. 6 the I.O. of this
case has simply stated that it was a case of eve teasing. Further, it
has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that neither the victim
P.W.1 was ready for her medical examination nor for recording her
statement u/s 164 of Cr.P.C. which is evident from Para 14 of P.W 6
who was the I.O. of this case. Further, the learned counsel also
pointed out that the charges u/s 354 of IPC and section 8 POCSO
Act also does not get substantive corroboration form the statement
of I.O. given in para 18-19 of the P.W. 6. Further, it is also submitted
that the appellant is jail about 1 and ½ years including the pre-
conviction and post-conviction period and in pre-conviction period
he had been in jail from 04.1.2017 to 17.05.17 and in the post-
conviction period he is in jail from 31.01.2022 till today and therefore
he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand learned Addl.P.P. Opposed the contentions
raised on behalf of the appellant.
Having heard the parties and perused the record of this case.
In the light of the forceful submission advanced on behalf of
the appellant it is proper and appropriate to extend the privilege of
bail to the appellant during the pending of this appeal. Accordingly,
3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 258 of 2022
the appellant- Madan Das is directed to be enlarged on bail,
during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions
Judge-Cum -Special Judge (POCSO Act), Koderma in Special
POCSO Case No. 13/2017, arising out of Jainagar P.S. Case No.
02/2017 subject to the condition as set out u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. and
further subject to conditions that appellant will deposit entire
amount of fine i.e. Rs. 25,000/- as awarded by the learned court
below under various section/count at the time of furnishing bail
bonds, in order to give it to the victim by way of compensation.
The learned court below is directed to issue notice to the P.W.
1 and after deposit the said fine amount by the appellant the same
shall be disbursed to the victim P.W. 1 by way of compensation on
her appearance and proper identification without being prejudice to
his rights of defence.
Accordingly I.A. No. 536 of 2023 gets disposed of.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
MM
