Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34363/2015rejected

Md. Jubair @ Juber @ Md. Jubaid Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2015-11-10Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34363 of 2015 (4) dt.10-11-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34363 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -16 Year- 2015 Thana -BASNAHI District- SAHARSA ======================================================

1. Md. Jubair @ Juber @ Md. Jubaid Alam S/o Late Md. Allauddin Resident of Village Pama, P.S. Basnahi, District Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuranand Jha(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 10-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Basnahi P.S. Case No. 16 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, the petitioner forcibly committed rape with the informant in the maize field and after causing threats started fleeing away but due to alarm being raised by the informant Md. Raju came who saw the petitioner fleeing away. Submission is of false implication and that the written report is only signed by the informant but its hands writing is of other person. Prosecution story appears not probable as in the day time several persons used to work in their field. The doctor

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34363 of 2015 (4) dt.10-11-2015 has not found any injury on her person. The petitioner is handicapped by 40 % and as such the petitioner who is suffering in custody since 01.03.2015 deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP opposes by submitting that Md. Raju has supported the allegation that he saw the petitioner fleeing away vide para 5 of the case diary and he brought the informant at the house.

In the facts and circumstances stated above and considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner is serious in nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same in view of the amended proviso of Section 309 of the Cr.P.C.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T