Jharkhand High CourtRavi Lohra vs The State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 9 July, 2018Author:Anil Kumar ChoudharyBench:Anil Kumar ChoudharyIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 756 of 2018

            Ravi Lohra                                        ...        Appellant
                                        Versus
            The State of Jharkhand & Anr.                         ...      RespondentsCoram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

            For the Appellant                  : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.For the State                      : Addl. PP
            For respondent no. 2               : Mr. S. T. Sajid, Adv.



09.07.18 / 03             Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learnedcounsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant.
            Respondent no. 2 is also present in person in the Court.This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being
            aggrieved by the order dated 28.03.2018 passed by learned
            Additional Judicial Commissioner-1, Ranchi in SC/ST case No. 34 of
            2018 in connection with Chanho P.S. Case No. 93 of 2017
            corresponding to G.R. Case No. 5845 of 2017 registered underSections 323,315,354,494,498A,376,509/34of the Indian Penal
            Code andSection 3/4D.P. Act whereby and whereunder the prayer
            for regular bail of the appellant was rejected.Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned
            Court below failed to take note of the fact that this is a case of
            consensual sexual relationship and the appellant and the informant
            are married couple and that the appellant has been in custody since
            30.10.17. It is also submitted that settlement has been arrived at
            between the respondent no. 2 and the appellant, hence, it is
            submitted that the impugned order dated 28.03.2018 passed by
            learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-1, Ranchi in SC/ST case
            No. 34 of 2018 in connection with Chanho P.S. Case No. 93 of 2017
            corresponding to G.R. No. 5845 of 2017 be set aside and the
            appellant be released on bail.Learned Addl. P.P. assisted by learned counsel for the
            respondent no. 2 and the respondent no. 2, who is present in Court
            in person, submitted that they have no objection, if the appellant is
            released on bail in view of the settlement between them.
           Considering the submissions of the learned counsels and facts
and circumstances of the case this Court is of the considered view
that this a fit case where the appellant be released on bail, hence the
impugned order dated 28.03.2018 passed by learned Additional
Judicial Commissioner-1, Ranchi in SC/ST case No. 34 of 2018 in
connection with Chanho P.S. Case No. 93 of 2017 corresponding to
G.R. no. 5845 of 2017 being not sustainable in law is set aside and the
appellant named above, is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- ( Rupees ten thousand), with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Judicial Commissioner-1, Ranchi in connection with
Chanho P.S. Case No. 93 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. no. 5845 of
2017 during pendency of the case.In the result this appeal is allowed.(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Smita/-