← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11653/2023dismissed

Deepak Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2023-05-10Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11653 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2020 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== DEEPAK THAKUR S/O Sadanand Thakur R/O Village- Kamalpura, Ward no- 12, P.S - Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 10-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Sitamarhi Mahila P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 instituted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4,8 of POCSO Act and under Section 3(1)(r)(w)/3(2)(Va) of S.C./S.T. (POA) Act lodged on 03.07.2020 by the informant Satrudha Paswan.

As per the FIR, informant's minor daughter was sexually exploited by Deepak Thakur on the pretext of marriage for the last two years and when she became pregnant, he refused to marry her. Thereafter, a 'panchayati' was held and accused Deepak Thakur was asked to marry informant's daughter but he denied. The parents of Deepak Thakur also refused to marry the victim girl and forced her for abortion. It is further alleged that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11653 of 2023(2) dt.10-05-2023 2/2 on 29.06.2020, minor victim girl gave birth to a girl child and they went to the accused persons to tell to accept her but they denied and assaulted them. Accordingly, the FIR. Considering the kind of allegation as also the fact that the case of 2020, the petitioner finally chose to come into judicial custody only in 2022, for the present this Court is not inclined to extend him privilege of bail.

Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan/ Sunil U T