Jharkhand High Court
Ritik Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 18 September, 2025
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1212 of 2023
-----
Ritik Kumar, S/o Logen Koranga,
R/o Dhaiya, Koranga Basti, P.O. I.S.M,
P.S. Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad
... Appellant(s).
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent(s).
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
------
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, AddI. P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
.........
09 /18.09.2025: I.A. No.10562 of 2024
This interlocutory application has been filed by the
informant-mother under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 praying
therein to cancel/ recall the order dated 15.07.2024 passed in this
case (I.A. No.6644 of 2024), whereby the sentence of this
appellant was suspended and consequently the appellant was
released on bail.
2. Heard the parties.
3. The F.I.R. was that the appellant herein committed rape
upon informant's daughter, who is physically disabled (deaf and
dumb). It is alleged that because of sexual assault, the daughter
became pregnant. Ultimately, after examination of the witnesses,
the Trial Court convicted the appellant. The informant in her
evidence stated that on the pretext of marriage, physical
relationship had developed, which resulted in this case.
4. After the conviction, this appeal was filed and was
admitted and this Court considering the materials on record and
also the delay in lodging the FIR, vide order dated 15.07.2024 has
suspended the sentence of the appellant and consequently
released him on bail.
5. Now the instant I.A. has been filed by the informant, who
is none but the mother of the victim, praying therein to
recall/cancel the order and also the bail. The ground taken by
the appellant is that after being enlarged on bail on 15.07.2024,
the appellant again started abusing and threatening the victim
and the family members of dire consequences. It is alleged that
the appellant has also threatened the child and there is an
eminent danger of life and liberty of the informant's family.
6. The aforesaid application was opposed by the appellant
and learned counsel for the appellant stated that the informant in
this case is in habit of lodging false cases. He submits that
Dhanbad P.S. Case No.201 of 2011 was lodged by this informant
against one Sajid Koranga, for offence under Section 376 of the
Indian Penal Code, alleging that said Sajid Koranga had
committed rape upon her daughter. Be it noted that victim is
same in this case also. The said judgment passed in Dhanbad P.S.
Case No.201 of 2011 has been brought on record.
7. After going through the said judgment in S.T. Case No.318
of 2011, we find that the allegation is that Sajid Koranga has
committed rape upon her daughter. In the case which was
registered under Section 376 of IPC, this informant was also
examined as a witness, as P.W.-3. She was later declared hostile
as she completely declined from her allegation of rape and rather
stated that due to some water dispute, some quarrel had taken
place and nothing happened with her daughter. On the basis of
this statement said Sajid Koranga was acquitted. This fact clearly
cast doubt about the character of the informant.
8. Further, the appellant in this case has alleged that rather he
has been assaulted by the informant and others, for which, F.I.R.
being Dhanbad P.S. Case No.49 of 2025 was instituted. The
medical report has also been brought on record which suggest
that there was assault upon him.
9. Considering these overall aspects, we are not inclined to
allow this interlocutory application, accordingly the same is
dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
18th September, 2025
R.S./Sandeep
