Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10644/2017rejected

Vijay Kumar @ Dr. Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-23Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10644 of 2017 (2) dt.23-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10644 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -42 Year- 2016 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- SIWAN ====================================================== VIJAY KUMAR @ DR. VIJAY KUMAR @ VIJAY YADAV S/o Kedar Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Orama, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, DistrictSiwan. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2017 Heard learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Siwan Mahila P.S. Case No. 42 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6/8 of POCSO Act.

Allegedly, when the informant went in the clinic of the petitioner she was brought inside and the petitioner told him to give injection and then tide her hands and legs and thereafter started committing rape with her. She raised alarm and came to her house and narrated the occurrence to her mother and sister. Submission is of false implication and that the prosecution story appears not probable and reliable, the petitioner has been made victim of circumstances, offence under POCSO Act is not

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10644 of 2017 (2) dt.23-03-2017 made out as the informant has been found aged about 19-20 years by the Medical Board, no sign of rape was found and further no injury was found on the person of the informant. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T