Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9069/2024bail rejected

Roshan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-15Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9069 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2023 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Roshan Kumar, aged about 18 years, Male Son of Gorkh Sah, Resident of Village - Panditpur, P.S. - Piprakothi, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 243 of 2023 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, all accused persons including the petitioner kidnapped the daughter of the informant forcibly with an intention to marry her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the informant and petitioner are not co-villagers and the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9069 of 2024(3) dt.15-04-2024 2/3 is living in Nanihal, which is the place of occurrence and due to dirty village politics, informant has lodged false and fabricated case against the petitioner. The real fact is that the informant's daughter is in love with Roshan Kumar (Petitioner) and both are major and wanted to solemnize marriage. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petitioner and is in custody since 01.11.2023.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. From perusal of the case diary, FIR and also perused the impugned order dated 07.12.2023 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, East Champaran, Motihari, Bihar, it appears that the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner. The victim girl has clearly stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. that Roshan Kumar (Petitioner) had forcibly taken her away to Raxaul, without her consent. All the witnesses have also supported the prosecution case. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. and 164 of the Cr.P.C. have fully supported the version in the FIR.

7. Considering these facts and circumstances of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9069 of 2024(3) dt.15-04-2024 3/3 case, including specific allegation against the petitioner and the victim statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

9. Learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated time, the petitioner shall have a liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.

U T