JUDGMENT I.A. No. 8112 of 2016. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned APP appearing for the State on an Interlocutory application bearing I. A. No.8112 of 2016 wherein prayer has been made to enlarge the appellant, abovenamed on bail, during the pendency of the appeal. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant has been languishing in jail custody since 22.08.2012 i.e. near about 5 years (half of the sentence) and the medical evidence does not support the oral evidence of the victim. He further submits that this Criminal appeal is not likely to reach within 10 years and, therefore, the appellant be admitted on bail. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposed the prayer and contention of the appellant on the ground that victim (P.W.3), aged about 16 years subsequently stated about the role played by the present appellant. P.W.7 is the Doctor who corroborated the oral testimony of the P.W.3 and, therefore, it is not a fit case to admit the appellant on bail. 4. Perused the lower court records. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the period of custody as well as considering the fact that this Criminal appeal is not likely to reach within 10 years, this Court, during pendency of the appeal, directs the Trial Court (learned Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum) to admit the appellant, above-named, on bail, on such terms and conditions as it may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case in connection with Sessions Trial Case No.16 of 2013, subject to condition that the appellant shall deposit a fixed deposit of Rs. Fifty thousand drawn in favour of the victim girl (P.W.3) before the court below at the time of furnishing of bail bond. The trial court will give direction to the concerned Bank that it will not permit the victim girl (P.W.3) to encash the same within ten years rather it will release the interest accrued thereupon quarterly in favour of the victim girl (P.W.3). 5. On perusal of the judgment, it appears that under the provision as contained in Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has been directed to grant compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the victim which is to be used for her rehabilitation. 6. 5. On perusal of the judgment, it appears that under the provision as contained in Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has been directed to grant compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the victim which is to be used for her rehabilitation. 6. This Court directs the victim to file an application before the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa claiming compensation under Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., as per the rate fixed. The Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa will forward the same to the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi. Thereafter, the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi will recommend the said application in accordance with law, for getting the amount of compensation released to be paid in favour of the victim girl. 7. The aforesaid interlocutory application, accordingly, stands disposed of. 8. Let a copy of the order be handed over to the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi who shall send the same to the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.