[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Durga Tete vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 January, 2026
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 375 of 2025
With
I.A. No. 11271 of 2025
----------
Durga Tete ..... Appellant
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Victim girl through father ..... Respondents
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
----------
For the Appellant : None
For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, A.P.P.
----------
07/08.01.2026 This Criminal appeal has been filed on
behalf of the appellant through JHALSA.
2. This case has been fixed vide Bench
Slip filed by the learned counsel for the appellant
yesterday on the ground that the appellant is in
custody for Seven and half (7 ½ ) years out of R.I. of
Eight (08) years.
3. None appears for the appellant today,
although Mr. Saurav Mahto, learned Panel Lawyer of
HCLSC has preferred this appeal under the
instruction of JHALSA, however, learned A.P.P. is
present.
4. This Criminal Appeal has been filed on
behalf of the Appellant challenging the judgment of
conviction dated 22.06.2024 and sentence dated
25.06.2024, passed by Shri Sanjeev Bhatia, Exclusive
Special Judge (POCSO), Gumla in Special POCSO
Case No.35 of 2018, arising out of Palkot P.S. Case No.
25 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 469 of
2018, by which the Appellant, namely Durga Tete has
been convicted for the offence under Section 4 of
POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Eight
(08) years and to pay the fine of Rs. 20,000/-.
5. This Interlocutory Application has
been filed on behalf of the appellant for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
It has been stated that out of Thirteen
(13) witnesses, except P.W. 6, 7 and 8, namely Kusum
Kumari, Dr. Shilpi Singh and Sachidanand Singh
respectively, all are highly interested witnesses.
It is stated that the P.W.1, i.e. the
Doctor, namely Dr. Vijya Rashmi Oraon, who
examined the victim girl, has found no sign of rape.
It is also stated that the appellant has
remained in custody for Seven and half (7 ½) years out
of the sentence of R.I. for Eight years and the
appellant may be enlarged on bail.
6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has
opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there
is direct allegation against the appellant for
committing rape upon the victim girl.
It is submitted that the victim girl,
during her statement recorded under Section 164
Cr.P.C., has fully supported the allegation against the
appellant.
It is submitted that the victim girl is
aged 14 years and the appellant took the victim girl in
jungle area and had committed rape upon her.
7. It is submitted that the Victim Girl has
been examined as P.W.2 and she has fully supported
the prosecution case. It is submitted that other
prosecution witnesses, i.e. P.W. 3, P.W.4, P.W. 5, who
are the mother, uncle and father of the victim girl
respectively, P.W. 6, i.e. the learned Judicial
Magistrate, who recorded the statement of the victim
girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and P.W.9, who is the
neighbour of the victim girl, have fully supported the
prosecution case.
It is submitted that P.W. 12 is the In-
Charge Headmaster, namely Gandira Oraon, who has
proved the Date of Birth of the victim girl as
02.07.2004 and thus, it is evident that the victim girl
was aged around 14 years on the date of occurrence.
It is submitted that P.W.11, namely
Ramashankar Prasad, is the I.O. of this case and he
has fully supported the prosecution case and had
submitted the Chargesheet against the appellant and
hence the prayer for bail made on behalf of the
appellant may be rejected.
8. Perused the Lower Court Record and
considered the submissions.
9. It transpires that the victim girl, aged
around 14 years, had lodged the F.I.R. on 05.05.2018
under Section 376 of I.P.C. and 4 of POCSO Act
against the appellant for forcibly committing rape
upon her on 04.05.2018.
10. It transpires that the victim girl has
supported the allegation against the appellant for
committing rape upon her during her statement
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also.
11. It appears that even while examined as
P.W.2, the victim girl has fully supported her case
against the appellant and she has stood the test of
cross-examination also. It also reveals from the
evidence that the appellant has committed rape upon
the victim girl seven times.
12. It further reveals that P.W.3 and P.W.5 are
the mother and father of the victim girl respectively
and P.W. 4 is the uncle and they have also supported
the prosecution case.
13. From perusal of the Lower Court Record, it
transpires that the appellant was remanded in this
case on 06.05.2018 and the entire ordersheet reveals
that he remained in custody from 06.05.2018 till
12.07.2019 in jail and thereafter, he was produced
before the learned Trial Court through Video
Conferencing from 27.08.2019 till the date of passing
of the judgment of conviction dated 22.06.2024 and
sentence dated 25.06.2024 respectively and the
appellant has also remained in custody after filing of
this criminal appeal till today, i.e. 08.01.2025.
14. Thus, the appellant has remained in
custody for Seven (07) years and around seven (07)
months out of R.I. of Eight (08) years.
15. Though the allegations against the
appellant are serious in nature, but considering the
fact that he has remained in custody for around Seven
(07) years and Seven (07) months out of R.I. of Eight
(08) years, the appellant, namely Durga Tete, is
directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO), Gumla/his
Successor Court in connection with Special POCSO
Case No.35 of 2018, arising out of Palkot P.S. Case No.
25 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 469 of
2018, subject to the undertaking that he will not
indulge in such type of crime again.
16. Call for report from the learned Secretary,
D.L.S.A. as to whether any compensation has been
given to the victim girl in the light of the order dated
25.06.2024 passed by the Exclusive Special Judge
(POCSO), Gumla, by which the case of the victim girl
was referred to the D.L.S.A., Gumla for deciding and
providing quantum of compensation to the victim as
per law.
17. Thus, I.A. No. 11271 of 2025 is allowed and
stands disposed of.
18. Put up this case on 29.01.2026.
19. Let a copy of this order be sent to the
learned Court below.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
s.m.
Dated 08.01.2026
