Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 848 (JHR)

Remay Karwa v. State Of Jharkhand

2017-05-10

ANANDA SEN, PRADIP KUMAR MOHANTY

body2017
JUDGMENT Pradip Kumar Mohanty, C.J. – I.A. No. 3757 of 2016 Heard Mr. Mahadeo Thakur, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. S.K. Sharma, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the Interlocutory Application bearing I.A. No. 3757 of 2016, wherein prayer has been made to enlarge the appellants, Remay Karwa, Modga Hessa and Landu Karwa on bail. 2. Mr. Mahadeo Thakur, counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Learned counsel further submits that the appellants were in custody since the year 2009, i.e. more than eight years. It is further submitted that this appeal is not likely to be heard within ten years and therefore, the appellants may be released on bail. 3. Mr. S.K. Sharma, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants and submitted that P.W.2, the victim girl, aged about 19 years specifically stated that gang rape has been committed upon her by the appellants. He further submitted that out of the said act, one child was born. P.W.11, Dr. Meera Kumari Arun, who conducted medical examination of the victim girl has opined that gang rape has been committed and hence, these appellants do not deserve to be released on bail. 4. Perused the lower court record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the judgment of the trial court and considering the evidence of P.W.2, the victim girl and the Doctor, P.W.11 and also the period of custody as well as the submission that this appeal is not likely to be heard within ten years and also by applying the ratio of the decision rendered in the case of Surinder Singh @ Shingara Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in (2005) 7 SCC 387 , the trial court ( Sessions Judge,West Singhbhum at Chaibasa) during the pendency of this appeal, is directed to admit these appellants on bail, on such terms and condition as he may deem fit and proper in S.T.No. 246 of 2009, subject to condition that the appellants shall appear before the trial court once in a month. The aforesaid I.A stands disposed of. 6. The aforesaid I.A stands disposed of. 6. On perusal of the judgment, it appears that under the provision contained in Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., 1973 the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has been directed to grant compensation of Rs. 2 lac each to the victim and her daughter as both the victim and her child are entitled for the same. 7. 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 , 1973 of Rs. 2 lac each. 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 application, in accordance with law, for getting the amount of compensation released, which is to be paid in favour of the victim girl and her child. All the exercises will be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Secretary, D.L.S.A, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa will ensure that the amount of compensation is released within a period of one month from the date of recommendation made by the Member Secretary, JHALSA. 8. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the Member Secretary, JHALSA, who shall send the same to the Secretary, D.L.S.A., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.