Raju Dahanga vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1612 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Raju Dahanga vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 August, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1327 of 2023
                                  ------
      Raju Dahanga, S/o late Jidang Dahanga, R/o Village Jalmay, P.O.
      Podonger, P.S. Bandgaon, District West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.
                                                           ... ... Appellant
                                     Versus
      The State of Jharkhand.                            ... ... Respondent
                                ------
            CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

      For the Appellant   :      Mr. N.K. Sahani, Advocate
                                 Ms. Sridhi Priya, Advocate
      For the State       :      Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.
                                 ------

06/ 06.08.2025

                            I.A. No.1836 of 2025

This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the

appellant praying therein to suspend the sentence and release him

on bail during pendency of this appeal.

2. It is the second attempt of the appellant praying to

release him on bail after suspension of sentence. Earlier his

application for suspension of sentence was dismissed vide order

dated 11.07.2024 passed in I.A. No.5775 of 2024.

3. The appellant has been convicted in connection with

POCSO Case No.11 of 2022 in the Court of Special Judge, POCSO

Act, Khunti, for offences under Section 363 IPC and Section 4(2)/17

of the POCSO Act. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for twenty years, with fine of Rs.50,000/- for offence

under Section 4(2)/17 of the POCSO Act and other sentence for other

offence.

4. Heard, learned counsel representing the appellant and

learned A.P.P. representing the State and have gone through the

impugned judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

5. Opportunity was given to learned A.P.P. representing the

State, to oppose the bail, which she availed and opposed.

6. After hearing the parties, we find that though the

allegation of commission of rape is not against this appellant but the

victim girl has categorically stated that this appellant along with

other accused had kidnapped her, taken her to the jungle, tied to a

tree and thereafter other accused person committed rape upon her

and this appellant was accompanying them and was keeping watch

so that no one could come there.

7. Considering the nature of evidence, which is against this

appellant, we are not inclined to reconsider the prayer of appellant

for suspension of sentence.

8. This interlocutory application is, accordingly, dismissed.

9. The appellant is at liberty to file an application for early

hearing of the appeal.

10. The office is directed to prepare the paper book.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Prashant. Cp-3