Sushanti Mundu @ Sushanti Guriya, aged about 34 years, wife of Roylen Guriya, resident v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1982 of 2023 ----- Sushanti Mundu @ Sushanti Guriya, aged about 34 years, wife of Roylen Guriya, resident at village Kalet Barka Toli, P.O. Dumangdiri, P.S. Torpa, District Khunti. … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ------- CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ------- For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr. Gaurav, Advocate : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. Order No. 05/Dated 22nd February, 2024 ------ 1. The instant appeal filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is directed against the order dated 12.10.2023 passed in A.B.P. No.580 of 2023 by learned Sessions Judge, Gumla whereby and whereunder the prayer of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Kurkura P.S. Case No.10 of 2022, registered under Section 363 and 370 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 79 and 81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Child) Act, 2015 and Section 14(1) of the Child Labour Act, 1986, has been rejected. 2.
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Gaurav, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is not named in the F.I.R. and she has been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co- accused Agni Horo, which has got no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. 2 3. It has been further contended that the appellant is in no manner concerned with the alleged offence and neither she enticed the victim girls nor she met with them. 4. It has been submitted that in course of investigation the informant as well as the victim girls were examined by the Investigating Officer but none of them have taken the name of the appellant with respect to involvement of the appellant in alleged offence. 5. The contention has been made that co-accused on whose confession the name of the appellant has surfaced, has been acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 15.07.2023 passed in S.T. No.176 of 2023. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that at the time of filing of the instant appeal, appellant was having three months’ baby in her lap and if the prayer of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail will not be allowed, the baby is also going to suffer with her mother (appellant). 7. The further submission has been made that the co- accused namely, Niranjan Kumar, has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1577 of 2022 and the case of the appellant is on better footing to that of the co-accused. 3 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is having no criminal antecedent and therefore, submits that it is a fit case where the appellant may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by showing interference with the impugned order. 9. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail and has submitted by referring to paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that from the confessional statement of one co- accused, namely, Agni Horo, that the present appellant used to supply her the girls for the last 7 – 8 years in lieu of money from Khunti area and recently the present appellant has supplied her 03 girls in lieu of Rs.30,000/- each. 10. He has further contended that the appellant is not cooperating in investigation and several notices under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. were served upon the mother in law of the appellant as she was absconding from her house. 11. It has been submitted that warrant of arrest has been issued against the present appellant on 03.06.2023 and since she has been evading her arrest, process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued and executed. 12. Further submission has been made that since process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued and 4 executed against the appellant, the prayer for anticipatory bail is not maintainable. 13. Learned Public Prosecutor, however, is not in a position to dispute the fact that co-accused against whom the allegation is identical in nature, has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 09.01.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1577 of 2022. 14. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and gone across the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State as well as the finding recorded in the impugned order. 15. This Court, taking into consideration the fact that since in this case no specific allegation has been attributed against the appellant and the similarly situated co-accused, namely, Niranjan Kumar, has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1577 of 2022, appellant is having no criminal antecedent and there is no material available on record to show the complicity of the appellant in trafficking of girls and particularly on the peculiar ground that the appellant is said to be a mother of three months baby on the date of filing of the appeal, who is at present 5-6 months old, is of the view that order dated 12.10.2023 passed in A.B.P. No.580 of 2023 requires interference. 5 16. Accordingly order dated 12.10.2023 passed in A.B.P. No.580 of 2023 by learned Sessions Judge, Gumla, is hereby quashed and set aside. 17. In consequence thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 18. Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned Court within a period of four weeks and in the event of her surrender, she will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Kurkura P.S. Case No.10 of 2022, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall cooperate in the investigation and shall make herself available for interrogation by the police as and when required and in case of non-cooperation, the bail bond of the appellant shall stand automatically cancelled. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Birendra/