Jharkhand High Court
Muni Kesh Kushwaha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 May, 2023
1 Cr. Revision No.167 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No.167 of 2023
Muni Kesh Kushwaha
@ Muni Kushwaha
@ Muni Keshav Kushwaha
@ Munni Kushwaha ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate
Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP
-----
2/04.05.2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the
judgment dated 10.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No. 194
of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the appeal preferred under Section
101 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and protection of children) Act against
the order dated 01.11.2022, passed by learned Principal Magistrate,
Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur in connection with Bagbera P.S.
Case No. 112 of 2022, registered under Sections 363, 366A, 506/34 of
the Indian Penal Code, was dismissed and thereby upheld the order
dated 01.11.2022, passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board,
Jamshedpur in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No. 112 of 2022, by
which the prayer for bail of the present Juvenile was rejected under
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, and this case is now pending before the Court of learned Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the gist of the
allegation against the petitioner as per the FIR was that this petitioner
had enticed the minor daughter aged about 15 years of the informant
with an intention to induce her to marry with him. It has further been
pointed out that the statement of the victim, who is said to be aged
about 15 years old, has been recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C.,
by which the entire case of the prosecution is falsified. It has further
been pointed out that the victim categorically stated in her statement
recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. that she had fled away from
her house along with this petitioner voluntarily and willingly with
whom she had been in love and further she categorically stated that
she along with this petitioner had been staying in a rental house and
she wanted to marry with this petitioner when she would become
major and thus the case of the prosecution is totally false and not
corroborated by the statement of the victim herself.
4. On the other hand, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and
submitted that the victim is a minor aged about 15 years and therefore
even her consent for marry is not tenable in the eyes of law to falsify
the case of the prosecution. Further it has also been pointed out that
after investigation, the charge-sheet has been submitted under
Sections 363,366A, 504 & 376(3) of the IPC and under Section 6 of the
POCSO Act and therefore this petitioner does not deserve to be
enlarged on bail.
5. Having heard the parties, perused the record of this case.
6. It is found that this petitioner is a child in conflict with law and
he is aged about 17 years, 01 month and 29 days at the time of the
commission of the offense. He is in jail since 27/7/2022. From the
statement of the victim recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it is
found that the victim had voluntarily and willingly gone with the
petitioner to marry with him when the police apprehended them. The
victim categorically stated that she would marry this petitioner, when
she would become major and they were in love and living in a rental
house and she had gone without any coercion and pressure from this
petitioner and in this view of the matter the entire case of the
prosecution gets falsified.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State also did not deny
the statement of the victim, which has been recorded under section
164 of the Cr.P.C.
From the impugned order, it appears that there is no adverse
report in the social investigation report and it is mentioned in the
social investigation report that there is a lack of control and proper
guardianship over the petitioner and the petitioner is influenced with
the social media and film. It has further been pointed out that there is
nothing on record about the criminal history of the petitioner and
therefore the possibility to come in the association of the known
criminals of the petitioner is very remote. Further in view of the
statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the further
detention of this petitioner would definitely expose his mental, moral,
physical and psychological danger to his life and therefore in the
interest of justice, it is found that let the petitioner be released on bail
in order to afford one opportunity to him to come into the mainstream
of the society.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail 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
the court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,
Jamshedpur, in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No. 112 of 2022,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. and
further subject to the conditions, inter alia as under:
(i) The father of the petitioner will be one of the
bailers;
(ii) The father of the petitioner will give an
undertaking that he will take proper care and attention of
the child and he will admit him in a school for further
studies;
(iii) The Secretary, DLSA is directed to take proper
steps for counseling of the child and also facilitate him to
get him admitted in a school and also to ensure that he
properly attends the school and continue with his studies
with the help of Legal cum probation officer.
(iv) Any other condition or conditions as the learned
Court below may deem it fit and proper in the interest of
child.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Secretary,
DLSA, Jamshedpur, the Principal District & Sessions Judge,
Jamshedpur-cum-Chairman, DLSA, Jamshedpur and Deputy
Commissioner-cum Vice Chairman, DLSA, Jamshedpur through FAX
to ensure that the Secretary, DLSA complies the direction in letter and
spirit as passed by this Court without any hindrances and obstacles.
8. Accordingly, this criminal revision is allowed and the impugned
judgment dated 10.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No. 194
of 2022 and order dated 01.11.2022 passed by learned Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur in connection with
Bagbera P.S. Case No. 112 of 2022 are set-aside.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.Kumar
