Anil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9467 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2017 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Madhepura ====================================================== ANIL KUMAR Son of Dinesh Rishidevi Resident of Village - Tamour Parasa, Ward No. 02, P.S. Murliganj, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 15 of 2017 arising out of Madhepura Mahila P.S. Case No. 39 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 504, of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition and Section 4 of POCSO Act. Informant has alleged in her written complaint that petitioner had established physical relation with her on promise of marriage for last two years and she became pregnant but he refused to marry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case only to make pressure upon the petitioner for marriage. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 14.12.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9467 of 2019(2) dt.19-02-2019 2/2 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Madhepura, in connection with POCSO Case No. 15 of 2017 arising out of Madhepura Mahila P.S. Case No. 39 of 2017 subject to the conditions that:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U T