Ajay Yadav @ Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12217 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-250 Year-2023 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Ajay Yadav @ Ajay Kumar Son of Bulu Yadav Resident of Vill.-Kewal Fariyatta, P.S.-Khaira, Distt.-Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pushpa Sinha.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Khaira Police Station Case No. 250 of 2023, disclosing offences under Section 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution, on 23.03.2023, in the night, at about 8:00-9:00 pm, while the informant had gone out of her house for attending natures call, the petitioner caught hold the informant, took her inside the community center and started misbehaving with her.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of concocted story as a counter blast to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12217 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/2 complaint case lodged by the father of the petitioner against informant's father and others bearing complaint case No. 436 of 2023 on 05.04.2023. There is a delay in lodging of the FIR inasmuch as the incident has taken place on 23.03.2023 but the FIR has been lodged on 04.06.2023.
5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the informant is a minor and the petitioner misbehaved with a minor girl, allegation against the petitioner is under Section 8 of the POCSO Act also and the delay has been explained in the FIR itself, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T