SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ravi Shek Anand @ Karu vs The State Of Bihar on 9 October, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Revision No.543 of 2018

Ravi Shek Anand @ Karu S/o Ranjay Kumar Singh, R/o Vill.- Bindi , P.S.-
Rajaman Distt.- Banka through legal Guardian namely Ranjan, Distt.-
Banka through legal Guradian namely Ranjay Kumar Singh, S/o
Bhuneshwar Prasad Singh R/o Vill.- Bindi, P.S.- Rajaman, Distt.- Banka.

…. …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar

…. …. Respondent

Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahani

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER

6 09-10-2018 This revision application has been filed against the order

dated 20.4.2018 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge,

Banka in Cr. Appeal No. 6 of 2015, arising out of Mahila P.S.Case

No. 2 of 2018, G.R.No. 94 of 2018, by which he has affirmed the

order dated 15.2.2018 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board,

Banka rejecting prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Prosecution case, in short, is that on 18.8.2017 at 9 PM

all of a sudden petitioner came and closed the mouth of informant

Ashu Kumari and at the point of gun he committed rape upon her.

Further allegation is that the petitioner has made vedeography and

photography and threatened her not to disclose the story otherwise

the photo will be viral and due to prestige the informant did not

disclose the same and later on the petitioner has continued to

sexually assaulted her and even after the marriage of the informant

the petitioner has viral the photo and she disclosed her age as 22
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.543 of 2018 (6) dt.09-10-2018

2/4
years.

During pendency of the case the petitioner has moved

before Juvenile Justice Board for determination of his age as he

claimed to be juvenile and the Juvenile Justice Board after enquiry

has assessed the age of the petitioner as 14 years 7 months 13 days

vide order dated 26.3.2018, which is Annexure-2 to the petition. It

also appears that thereafter the petitioner has moved for bail

before the Juvenile Justice Board which was rejected vide order

dated 15.2.2018 (Annexure-3), on the ground that allegation is

serious in nature and he is not a student of any school and as such

in absence of any proper look after by his family members there is

chance of coming into the bad contacts and local persons are also

aggrieved by his act. The aforesaid order has been challenged by

the petitioner in Cr.Appeal No. 6 of 2018 which was also

dismissed vide order dated 20.4.2018 on the ground that allegation

is serious and social investigation report shows that he is in

contact of bad association and his release will defeat the ends of

justice. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the present

revision application has been preferred by the petitioner on the

ground that both the learned JJB and appellate court have failed to

consider that the petitioner is aged 14 years 11 months 13 days,

whereas the lady is aged 22 years and independent witness during

investigation has not supported the prosecution in view of the fact

that there is no videography or photography is available in the case
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.543 of 2018 (6) dt.09-10-2018

3/4
diary and only allegation has been made against the petitioner and

he is in custody for eight months and on those grounds the

judgment of appellate court as well as order of JJB is bad in law

and not sustainable in the eye of law.

Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the

informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail on the ground

that allegation is serious in nature and there is allegation of his

coming into contact of bad elements and as such the prayer for

bail has rightly been rejected by JJB and appellate court and the

same does not require any interference by this Court.

Having heard the parties and on perusal of the record it

appears that against the order declaring the petitioner as juvenile

was challenged by the petitioner before the District and Sessions

Judge in appeal and that criminal appeal was also dismissed by

learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 14.9.2018 and as such the

petitioner is juvenile aged 14 years 7 months 13 days and the same

has been affirmed by the appellate court also. So far allegation is

concerned, there is allegation that on the point of pistol the

petitioner has committed rape a lady aged 22 years and also made

viral the videography and photography. However, in the case diary

witnesses have stated that she had love affair with the petitioner

but she was later on married with some other person and when her

husband and family members came to know about the same the

marriage was dissolved, which will appear from paragraphs 9 and
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.543 of 2018 (6) dt.09-10-2018

4/4
10 of the case diary. It also disclosed that the prosecutrix after

dissolving her marriage tried to make contact with the petitioner

and due to which petitioner has been made accused in this case.

Apart from that, no videography or photograph is available in the

case diary.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

case, this revision application is allowed. The impugned judgment

of appellate court and order of JJB are set aside.

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on

furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

Juvenile Justice Board, Banka, in connection with Mahila

P.S.Case No. 2 of 2018, G.R.No. 94 of 2018, subject to the

condition that one of the bailors shall be the father of the petitioner

and further during pendency of the case petitioner shall be under

supervision of Probation Officer, who will watch conduct of the

petitioner.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
spal/-

U T

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation