Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 April, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No.1260 of 2019
....
Manoj Saw ......Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Munni Devi @ Muniya Devi ......Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P
......
Order No.09/30.04.2025
I.A. No.2393 of 2025
This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on
behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment and order of
sentence dated 16.03.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.18 of
2014 by Smt. Rita Mishra, then learned Sessions Judge, Chatra by
which the preferred appeal has been dismissed and the prayer for
bail has been rejected thereby affirming the judgment and order of
sentence dated 25.02.2014 passed in G.R. Case No.805 of 2007
(arising out of Itkhori P.S. Case No.170/07) by Sri Tarun Kumar,
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chatra, by which the petitioner has
been convicted for the offences under Section 323,341 and 354 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for six (06) months, SI for one
(01) month and S.I. for one (01) year respectively and to pay the
fine of Rs.1000/-.
2. I.A. No.2393 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
impugned judgments and order of sentence passed by the learned
Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of
law. It is submitted that allegations levelled against the petitioner
for outraging the modesty are false and concocted. It is submitted
that there is a case and counter case between both the sides. It is
further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 11.11.2024
and hence he may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, Learned APP has opposed the prayer
for bail. It is submitted that there is direct allegation against the
petitioner for outraging the modesty of the O.P. No.2 and for
tearing blouse of the O.P. No.2. It is submitted that the P.W-2,
PW-3 and PW-4 namely Vikas Sao, Munni Devi @ Muniya Devi
(Informant/Victim), and Basanti Devi respectively have fully
supported the case and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected.
6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from
perusal of the records of this case, it appears that the petitioner is
said to have outraged the modesty of O.P. No.2.
7. It also appears that there is a claim and a counter claim
between the parties. It also appears that the petitioner had done
work in the house of the O.P. No.2. It appears that the petitioner is
a Rajmistri i.e. Mason.
8. It appears that the petitioner is in custody since
11.11.2024.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and
also considering the custody of the petitioner, the petitioner namely
Manoj Saw is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rs.Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri Tarun Kumar,
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chatra or his Successor Court in
connection with G.R. Case No.805 of 2007 arising out of Itkhori
P.S. Case No.170/07 subject to the condition that the petitioner
shall pay Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five thousand) to the O.P. No.2
by way of compensation by Demand Draft in the name of the O.P.
No.2 or by depositing the cash of Rs.25,000/- and the said
Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five thousand) shall be handed over to the
O.P. No.2 by the learned Court below on filing such an application
on her behalf and by informing the O.P. No.2 through Para Legal
Volunteers working in the Civil Courts, Chatra.
10. Thus, I.A. No.2393 of 2025 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Nishant/-
