Azad Purti @ Akash Purti vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 611 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Azad Purti @ Akash Purti vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 19 January, 2024

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
              B.A. No. 11291 of 2023
                       ------

     Azad Purti @ Akash Purti               ...              Petitioner
                                  Versus
    The State of Jharkhand                  ...           Opposite Party
                                   ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Harsh Chandra, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.

------

Order No.02 Dated- 19.01.2024

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of bail in connection with Parsudih P.S. Case No.25 of 2023 (Special POCSO Case No.31 of 2023) registered for the offences punishable under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/6/12 of POCSO Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl and committed rape upon her. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh in the case of Reddi Chandra Sekhararao Sekhar vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2021 0 Supreme (AP) 284, it is submitted that in that case where the accused of the case was ready to undergo DNA test to prove his innocence and was a constable in Marine police, the court granted him bail. It is then submitted that the petitioner denies that he is the biological father of the child in the womb of the victim and the petitioner has filed a petition for the DNA sampling. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Spl. P.P. on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in view of the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

In view of serious nature of offence involved in this case and the period in custody already undergone by the petitioner; the learned trial court is directed to take up the trial expeditiously and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order by the learned trial court.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/