Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25027/2016rejected

Lakhi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-11Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 25027 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2016 Thana -PIPRA District- PATNA ====================================================== Lakhi Kumar, Son of Raju Kewat, Resident of Village- Puraniya, P.S.- Pipra, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Gupta, Advocatet For the Opposite Party : Mr. Binod Kr-3(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 11-08-2016 Heard both the sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pipra P.S. Case No. 21 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act.

The victim alleged that Seema Kumari called her in her house to help her in lifting jute bag. When the informant entered into the house of Seema Kumari, her villager Lakhi Kumar was present there from before. Seema Kumari locked her inside the room and fled away. Lakhi Kumar committed rape with her. Then she raised alarm and thereafter Chunnu Kumar, brother of Seema Kumari, came and opened the door.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25027 of 2016 (3) dt.11-08-2016 2/2 entire story is false and concocted. The petitioner is the neighbour of the victim and there is land dispute between the father of the victim and the father of the petitioner. Many persons have sworn affidavits and a petition is filed before the superior police officer stating that no occurrence as alleged has ever taken place, but from perusal of the case diary, it appears that besides the victim, other witnesses have also supported the factum of rape. The victim, in her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., reiterated the same fact. The victim appears to be a minor. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Pipra P.S.Case No. 21 of 2016. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below, the court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on its own merit.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Rajiv/- U T