DHULLU MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General for the State assisted by Mr. Rajiv Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the informant.

(2.) The petitioner is an accused in connection with Katras P.S. Case No. 178 of 2019.

(3.) It has been alleged that on 13.11.2015, the petitioner who is a Member of the Legislative Assembly from Baghmara had made a call from mobile no. 9279702831 to the mobile of the informant and requested the informant to accompany him to Ranchi which was refused by the informant. The accused person had once again tried to contact her and persuade the informant to come for shopping but it was once again refused by the informant. It has been alleged that a week thereafter the accused persons on the pretext of party work had invited the informant to a Guest House where the petitioner along with Anand Sharma were present. The petitioner had tried to outrage the modesty of the informant by inappropriately and indecently touching her body. She somehow managed to free herself and escaped. It has also been alleged that a few days later Anand Sharma had come to her shop and disclosed that if she accepts the advances of the petitioner she will be showered with riches and if she refuses she will be ruined by the petitioner. The informant alleges that the petitioner regularly called her at midnight and gave indecent proposals and threats were also extended by the musclemen of the petitioner.