Rahul Singh @ Ashok Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8112 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -177 Year- 2016 Thana -SAHPUR District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Rahul Singh @ Ashok Singh, son of Sri Nagendra Singh, resident of Village- Sarna, P.S.- Shahpur, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anand Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 03-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Shahpur P.S. Case No.177 of 2016 instituted under Section(s) 376, 506, 379/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from sexual offences Act pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st, Bhojpur at Ara.

As per written report, petitioner committed rape with the informant after removing her clothes and tying her mouth. The victim girl in her statement under Section 164 Cr. P. C. has supported the case and alleged that the petitioner committed rape with her at the point of knife. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is variation in the statement of the victim girl given in 164 Cr. P. C. statement and the statement made by her in the First Information Report. There is also delay in lodging the First Information Report

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8112 of 2017 (3) dt.03-04-2017 2/2 as the occurrence has taken place on 07.07.2016 and the First Information Report has been lodged on 09.07.2016. The doctor has not found any sign of rape during medical examination. The learned APP has submitted that independent witnesses in para 54, 55, 56 have supported the case of the informant. The informant in her further statement in para 2 has supported the case. Learned APP has further submitted that a Panchayati was held and, therefore, delay took place in lodging the First Information Report, which is apparent from para 56 of the case diary.

In such circumstances, since there is specific allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to him.

Prayer for bail is rejected.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T