Parna Soren @ Pranalal Soren @ Parnalal ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1576 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Parna Soren @ Pranalal Soren @ Parnalal ... 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. 390 of 2024
                                    ------
         Parna Soren @ Pranalal Soren @ Parnalal Soren
                                                     .... .... .... Appellant
                                Versus
         The State of Jharkhand                      .... .... .... Respondent

         CORAM:           SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

For the Appellant : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate Mr. Amresh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P.

------

06/05.08.2025 I.A. No. 798 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 This is the second attempt for suspension of sentence and grant of bail made on behalf of the appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

3. The appellant has been convicted under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC in Special POCSO Case No. 10 of 2021 arising out of Littipara P.S. Case No. 62 of 2020. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for offence under Section 366 of IPC and RI for 10 years and a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, RI of 3 months for each default.

4. 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. Earlier order clearly suggests that the victim who is minor aged about 11 years, has supported the case of sexual assault and medical evidence also suggests that there is a sexual assault.

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

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and appellant has not even completed half of the sentence, we are not inclined to release the appellant on bail.

7. Accordingly, I.A. No.798 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Sandeep/Pawan