State of Jharkhand vs Md. Sufiyan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 51

B. R. GAVAI, SANDEEP MEHTA
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Md. Sufiyan – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Adv., Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sureshan P., AOR, Mr. Shivam Yadav, Adv., Mr. Deepak Joshi, Adv.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. We find that the approach adopted by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in passing the impugned judgment and order dated 15th June, 2021 is totally against the well laid down principles of law. PS Case No. 96 of 2020 has been registered against the respondent- accused under Sections 341, 354B, 504, 506,509 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 8 of POCSO Act, and Section 66E, 67 of the I.T. Act.

3. The allegations against the respondent are that he had outraged the modesty of the first informant and made an indecent video viral on social media.

4. It appears that the respondent (petitioner before the High Court) has made a statement that he was willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case and also undertook to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) as ad interim victim compensation to the informant without prejudice to his defence.

5. The High Court unilaterally accepted the statement and directed the respondent herein (original petitioner) to deposit such an amount as ad interim compensation to the victim as a ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the respondent.

6. The factors on which anticipatory bail could be g

Click Here to Read the rest of this document