Shashdhar Kumbhakar @ Shashadhar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1570 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Shashdhar Kumbhakar @ Shashadhar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 August, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.100 of 2024
                                   -----
           Shashdhar Kumbhakar @ Shashadhar Kumbhakr, S/o Raghu
           Kumbhakar, R/o Ward No.13, PO Kandra, P.S. Kandra, District
           Seraikella Kharsawan
                                                     ... Appellant(s).
                                   Versus
           The State of Jharkhand
                                                     ... Respondent(s).

           CORAM        :     SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Spl. P.P.

.........

08 /05.08.2025: I.A. No.5883 of 2025 This interlocutory application has been filed by the appellant, praying therein to suspend the sentence and release him on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

2. The interlocutory application for suspension of sentence of this appellant was earlier withdrawn on 13.08.2024.

3. This is second attempt of the appellant praying for suspension of sentence and release on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

4. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced in connection with in POCSO Case No.32 of 2020, arising out of Kandra P.S. Case No.34 of 2020, for the offence under Sections 506/376(3) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 25 years and with a fine of Rs.30,000/- for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act.

5. Heard, the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State and have gone through the impugned judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

6. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the bail, which the State availed and opposed.

7. After going through the evidence of the victim, we find that she has supported the prosecution case. She is admittedly a minor school going girl, who was raped by the petitioner. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is delay of three months in lodging the F.I.R., but at this stage, we are not inclined to make any comments of the same, considering the status of the girl and socio-economic background from where she comes, but the facts remain that she in her evidence has supported the entire prosecution case. Prima facie, we are not satisfied on the point raised by the petitioner for seeking bail application, thus we are not inclined to release the appellant on bail.

8. Accordingly, I.A. No.5883 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) R.S.