Manoj Marandi @ Manoj Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4077 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 15269 of 2021
          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2019 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui
 ======================================================

Manoj Marandi @ Manoj Kumar, aged about 30 years, Male, Son of Baldeo Marandi, Resident of Village- Karahra Tola Bhalbinda, PS- Jhajha, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

 For the Petitioner/s      :        Mr. Bharat Lal, Advocate
 For the State             :        Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, APP
 For the Informant         :        Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 12-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Bharat Lal, learned counsel for the

petitioner; Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State and Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Jhajha PS Case No. 236 of 2019 dated 15.08.2019, instituted

under Sections 323, 354(B), 307, 376, 506, 509, 366, 313 and

394/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had

established physical relationship with the informant in the year

2012 and even after getting a job in the BSF in the year 2013, he

had maintained the relationship and had promised to marry her

and in the year 2018, they had cohabited and when the informant

had conceived, she was made to abort and thereafter when she

had gone to the house of the petitioner, initially she was told to

keep quiet, but later, she was abused, threatened and assaulted and

was told that she should forget about the whole thing and they

would get the petitioner married somewhere else.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

after being employed in the BSF in the year 2013, he used to

come to his village only after 2-3 years and there was no

occasion to be in touch with the informant. It was submitted that

it is also unbelievable that the informant would wait for six

years to lodge the complaint when the petitioner admittedly was

employed in BSF in the year 2013 itself, and the informant was

aged 19 years and, thus, there was no legal impediment for

marriage and raising no claim for marriage shows the falsity of

the case. It was further submitted that the allegation that she

went to the house of the petitioner in the year 2019 and was

turned out is also false since the petitioner had already Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

married someone else in the year 2017 and, thus, on 14.02.2019,

there could not have been any occasion for the family members

of the petitioner to tell the informant that she should forget

about the petitioner and that they shall get the petitioner married

somewhere else. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner

has no criminal antecedent and because of this false case, his job

is also at stake.

6. On 17.06.2021, the Court had asked learned APP to

get the up-to-date legible photo copy of the entire case diary as

also a report with regard to the stand taken by the petitioner that

he had married another woman in the year 2017, from the

Superintendent of Police, Jamui.

7. As the report submitted by the Superintendent of

Police, Jamui indicated that no evidence was found of the

petitioner having married in the year 2017, the Court had noted

that such report was not based on verification done from the

village of the said lady, a fresh report was required was directed to

be submitted in terms of order dated 19.07.2021. The same has

been submitted under letter dated 03.08.2021 of the

Superintendent of Police, Jamui in which it has been stated that

the Superintendent of Police, Jamui had himself visited the village

of Ranju Kumari, whom the petitioner claims to have married, and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

on the basis of statement of independent witnesses and the

neighbours, it has transpired that the petitioner had married her in

the year 2017 and there is a girl child also born out of the

wedlock. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner had also

undertaken to file supplementary affidavit bringing on record

certificate of the employee i.e., the BSF authorities with regard to

petitioner having informed the BSF about his marriage in the year

2017 itself. He submitted that a supplementary affidavit has been

filed. However, from perusal of the same, it appears that till date,

there is no nomination of any person in the service record of

petitioner before the BSF and it has been stated that the same is in

process. Moreover, the date on which the form has been filled up

is 12.08.2019 i.e., much after the so-called marriage as also the

filing of the present case.

8. Learned APP assisted the Court on the basis of the

communication received from the Superintendent of Police,

Jamui, as referred to above.

9. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the

allegations are correct and during investigation also witnesses

have supported the same. On a query of the Court with regard to

there being no statement of any independent witness recorded and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

only interested witnesses from the village of the informant having

been examined, learned counsel could not controvert the same.

10. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the

Court finds that a serious doubt has been created with regard to

the varicity of the allegation as it has not been explained as to why

the informant would wait for six years after the petitioner had

already been employed and would not press for marriage and

would be satisfied with the casual relationship between the parties,

as both were majors and there was no other impediment coming in

the way of marriage.

11. Further, the Superintendent of Police, Jamui himself

having inquired from independent witnesses with regard to the

petitioner having married Ranju Kumari in the year 2017 and the

allegation being that in the year 2019, the informant had gone to

the house of the petitioner where she was assured that she would

be married to the petitioner and on 14.02.2019, she was ousted

from the house also indicates that the wife of the petitioner being

in the house, it is difficult to accept that she would have been kept

in the house and assurance of marriage would be given and that

she would not know that already the petitioner is married and the

wife is living in the house. Thus, taking an overall view of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

matter, for the purpose of considering the present application for

grant of pre-arrest bail, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer.

12. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner

be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/-

(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each

to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial

Magistrate, Jamui in Jhaja PS Case No. 236 of 2019, subject to the

conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 and further, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a

close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the

bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to

good behaviour of the petitioner and (iii) that the petitioner shall

co-operate with the Court and police/prosecution. Any violation of

the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure

to co-operate shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

13. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

14. The petition stands disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

15. With regard to the issue of the reports submitted by

the Superintendent of Police, Jamui, the Court finds that he is

required to explain as to how the first report was submitted by him

dated 03.07.2021 in complete violation of the order of the Court

dated 17.06.2021, for the reason that in the entire report, the

investigation which had already been done in the year 2019 and

his report II dated 30.11.2019, has been relied upon, without any

verification with regard to the stand taken by the petitioner

relating to details of the girl who he claimed to have married in

the year 2017. Thus, no steps taken for such verification in terms

of order dated 17.06.2021 and reliance placed on the investigation

already concluded in the year 2019, is clearly contemptuous and a

blatant violation of the direction of the Court by the

Superintendent of Police, Jamui as contained in order dated

17.06.2021. Thus, let the Superintendent of Police, Jamui submit

an explanation as to why the Court may not take strict notice of

such blatant violation of the specific direction of the Court and

pass appropriate orders.

16. Accordingly, the matter be listed on 31st August,

2021, among the top five cases, when explanation personally by Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15269 of 2021 dt.12-08-2021

the Superintendent of Police, Jamui shall be placed before the

Court by the learned APP.

17. It is made clear that the matter will be listed on the

next date only for the purpose of considering the explanation of

the Superintendent of Police, Jamui as on merits it has already

been disposed of.

18. Learned APP shall communicate the order to the

Superintendent of Police, Jamui.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T