The Jharkhand High Court reaffirmed that bail must be refused where the prosecutrix’s testimony fully supports grave allegations of gang rape and kidnapping under POCSO Act and B.N.S. The ruling upholds existing standards for bail in serious sexual offences and operates as binding precedent for subordinate courts handling similar matters.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | B.A./9357/2025 of DINBANDHU MAHTO Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND |
| CNR | JHHC010319212025 |
| Date of Registration | 26-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 17-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Rejected |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH |
| Court | High Court of Jharkhand |
| Precedent Value | Binding precedent on bail applications involving similar facts and legal provisions |
| Type of Law | Criminal Law (POCSO Act, B.N.S.) |
| Questions of Law | Whether bail should be granted when the prosecutrix’s evidence fully supports prosecution in serious sexual offence cases under the POCSO Act and B.N.S. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that due to the grave nature of allegations—kidnapping and gang rape—and the fact that the victim’s testimony supports the prosecution, bail cannot be granted. The seriousness and gravity of the accusation override the request for bail when the prosecutrix corroborates the prosecution’s case. The decision considers both the nature of offence and evidentiary status, reaffirming a cautious approach to bail in sexual offences involving minors under the POCSO Act. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner is accused of kidnapping and gang raping the informant’s daughter along with others. The victim, during trial, gave evidence fully supporting the prosecution case. The case is pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ranchi. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Jharkhand handling bail in POCSO and serious sexual offence cases |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and potentially the Supreme Court in similar bail matters |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The Court emphasized that where the prosecutrix’s trial testimony fully supports the prosecution in grave offences under POCSO Act and B.N.S., bail is to be categorically denied.
- Reaffirms that the gravity and seriousness of the accusation, particularly involving sexual offences against minors, are decisive grounds for bail rejection.
- Establishes a clear standard for rejecting bail where victim corroboration exists, relevant for all practitioners handling bail petitions in sexual offence matters.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court took note that the petitioner faces accusations for kidnapping and gang rape under Sections 70(2), 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
- It was expressly recorded that the victim’s statement was given during trial and that she fully supported the prosecution’s version of events.
- Given the seriousness and gravity of the allegations, the Court held that releasing the petitioner on bail was unwarranted.
- The reasoning underscores that corroborative victim testimony in cases of this nature warrants continued custody and denial of bail, consistent with current bail principles under POCSO and B.N.S.
Factual Background
The petitioner was implicated in Tamar P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025 (Special POCSO Case No. 109 of 2025) for offences under Sections 70(2), 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The incident allegedly occurred on 08.05.2025 at around 11:00 P.M., where the petitioner and others kidnapped the informant’s daughter and gang raped her. The victim’s statement during trial fully corroborated the prosecution’s case. The matter is pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ranchi.
Statutory Analysis
- Sections 70(2), 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 6 of the POCSO Act were invoked.
- The decision was based on the grave nature of the offences under these statutory provisions.
- No expansive or narrow interpretation was discussed; rather, the focus was on the factual application and gravity of the charges as per the existing statutory framework.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision upholds the existing law that bail should be rejected when the prosecutrix’s evidence strongly supports prosecution in serious sexual offence cases.