36116) Pawan Kumar Tiwari @ Pawan Kumar, aged about 25 years, Son of Gajendra v. 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Victim
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.). No. 749 of 2025 (2025:JHHC:36116) Pawan Kumar Tiwari @ Pawan Kumar, aged about 25 years, Son of Gajendra Tiwari, resident of Rathand, P.O.- Hosir, P.S.- Gomia, District- Bokaro Appellant … .. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Victim ----- … .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant For the State For the Resp. No.2
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, Advocate : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P. : Md. A. Ansari, Advocate ….. ORAL ORDER IN COURT Order No. 06 /01st December 2025 1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 214 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 376/313/406/420/504/506/ of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(S) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, pending in the Court of Shri Yashwant Prakash, learned A.J.C.II-Cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST Act at Ranchi. 2. As per FIR, the appellant is alleged to have established physical relationship with the victim lady on the pretext of marriage. He also recorded her obscene and vulgar video and on the basis of that video, he started demanding money. Furthermore, he also threatened the victim girl to circulate her videos on internet made by him as a consequence of not giving him money. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl.PP as well as learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the victim girl and appellant, both are major (2025:JHHC:36116) and with their own consent, they have established physical relationship with each other. It is submitted that there are also monetary transaction between both the sides. It is submitted that in the catena of decisions, if two adults establish a physical relationship with each other then no offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, is made out. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a judgment of Jaspal Singh Kaural v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Another passed in Criminal Appeal No. of 2025 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4007 of 2024 (Paragraph No. 14 and 16) on 07.04.2025. 5. It is submitted that appellant is working in Jindal Company, whereas the informant is a nurse. It is further submitted that mere issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. will not come as a bar in each and every cases in view of the recent judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Asha Dubey v. The State of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 4564 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 13123 of 2024 on 12.11.2024 .
Decision
6. It is submitted that in view of the above and also in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the anticipatory bail will be maintainable and hence, the appellant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. On the other hand, learned Spl.P.P. has opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellant. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant, after adopting the submission learned Spl.P.P. for the State, has submitted that there is a direct allegation against the appellant for committing rape upon the victim girl on the pretext of marriage and for preparing her obscene video and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail may be rejected. 2 (2025:JHHC:36116) 9. Perused the FIR and case diary and considered the submissions of both the sides. 10. As learned counsel for the State has raised the submission that the anticipatory bail is not maintainable in view of Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., however, this Court is inclined to dispose of the plea on merit also. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the case Asha Dubey v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Supra) at paragraph-8 which read as follows: “Para No:- 8. Coming to the consideration of anticipatory bail, in the event of the declaration under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., it is not as if in all cases that there will be a total embargo on considering the application for the grant of anticipatory bail.” 11. It appears that the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that mere issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., is not a bar for grant of anticipatory bail and there is not a total embargo on considering the application for grant of anticipatory bail. However the Hon’ble Supreme Court has interfered with the matter by observing that the son of the appellant was arrested and was in custody whereas the appellant Asha Dubey was the mother-in-law of the victim of the deceased and as such interim protection was granted to her. Thus, the above judgment is not applicable in the case of the appellant and therefore, in view of the issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., anticipatory bail application of the appellant is not maintainable. 12. However, as the learned counsel for the appellant raised the submission on merit also, therefore this case is being decided on merit also by going through the FIR and Case Diary. 13. It appears from the FIR that though the victim girl is aged 3 (2025:JHHC:36116) around 24 years and the appellant who is also a major, were in relationship for last two years, however, it is specific allegation in the FIR that the appellant had established physical relationship with the victim girl and had prepared her indecent and obscene video and even by during video call, the appellant forced her to display that video and he used to demand money and also continued to establish physical relationship with her. It is alleged that she has disbursed the amount several times by way of online and cash to the appellant also. 14. It appears that appellant is also alleged to have abused her in the name of her caste also. 15. This is not one of such cases that the appellant has established physical relationship with the victim girl merely on the pretext of marriage rather this is a case in which the appellant had established physical relationship with the victim girl not only on the pretext of marriage but also by blackmailing her and by preparing her obscene video. Although the Investigating Officer has not recovered any such video and the victim girl has also not stated about the exact amount given to the appellant by cash as well as by UPI, however, the Investigating Officer had obtained certificate from the Branch Manager of the Bank regarding online transaction from mobile phone of the victim girl to the bank account of the appellant which is at Para No. 67 of the Case Diary however, the said certificate has not been enclosed with the Case Diary. 16. It appears from the medical report of the victim girl, which has been enclosed in the case diary that the Doctor has opined that sexual assault cannot be ruled out. 17. In view of the above, this court is not inclined to enlarge the appellant on anticipatory bail. 4 (2025:JHHC:36116) Thus, the prayer of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail, is rejected on merit also. 18. Accordingly, the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by Shri Yaswant Prakash, learned A.J.C-II-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ranchi in A.B.P. No. 803 of 2025 in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 214 of 2024 is upheld. 19. Thus, Cr. Appeal (S.J.). No. 749 of 2025 is dismissed. Dated:- 01.12.2025. Aditi (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 5