IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A. No.4195 of 2022

------

Haradhan Kumar Mahto @ Haradhan Mahto

....

....

….

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

....

....

....Opposite Party

------

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

------

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Dilip Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Addl.P.P

------

Order No.05 Dated- 22.07.2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Kasmar P.S. Case

No. 11 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.173 of 2022 instituted under

Sections 448, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved

this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

As per F.I.R., the allegation is that on 10.02.2022, informant was

sleeping in her house with her children then petitioner in drunken state

came and asked the informant through his mobile to open the door, but

informant refused to open the door then present petitioner pressurized

the informant to open the door. It is further alleged that as soon as the

informant opened the door of her house, petitioner entered into her

house and started molesting and doing wrong things (ganda kaam) with

her. Upon her raising alarm, people from nearby assembled but

petitioner succeeded to flee away from there.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has

been falsely implicated in this case due to dispute between the husband

of informant and present petitioner. It is further submitted that in

course of investigation, no one has seen the petitioner on spot rather the

informant has disclosed to all the witnesses that petitioner entered into

her house with bad intention and attempted to molest her and when she

raised alarm, nearby people came but petitioner managed to flee away

from there, so all the allegations leveled against petitioner seem to be

false and highly improbable. It is further submitted that none of the

villagers assembled at the place of occurrence have corroborated the

prosecution story as alleged by the informant. The victim, in her

statement recorded under Sections 164 of Cr.P.C., has reiterated about

the commission of rape by petitioner and trend of investigation is

leading towards commission of offence under Section 376 and 511 of

IPC. Informant did not allow for her medical examination as such false

implication cannot be ruled out. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

In case of his arrest at the hands of police, petitioner shall sustain

irreparable loss. It is further submitted that petitioner undertakes to co-

operate with the investigation of the case and will not indulge in

tampering with prosecution evidence and will abide by all terms and

conditions imposed by this Court in the matter of granting anticipatory

bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner may be extended the

privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for

anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is serious

allegations of indecent assault and ravishing the victim while she was

alone in her house with her minor children. The defence plea has been

taken by petitioner about money dispute between the husband of

informant and present petitioner, is a matter of trial and no cogent

documents has been filed in this regard, hence, there is no reason for

false implication of petitioner in this case. During investigation,

witnesses have corroborated the prosecution story. Hence, petitioner

may not be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of

allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record

and also in view of the gravity of offence a