Ranjan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12275 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2022 Thana- TARAPUR District- Munger ====================================================== RANJAN YADAV Son of Srilal Yadav R/o- Dhobai, P.S.- Tarapur, DistrictMunger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 24.10.2022 in connection with Tarapur P.S. Case No. 179 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 24.10.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 376A&B, 342, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner Ranjan Yadav has tied a towel around the mouth of the informant's daughter/victim aged about 11 years and committed rape with her at field, when the victim had gone out four natural call. The petitioner has also threatened her of dire consequences. It is further alleged that when the informant went his house for complain then the petitioner started abusing her and told her to do whatever she can do.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12275 of 2023(2) dt.09-05-2023 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her and the Medical Board also suggest that the age of the victim girl is 11 years and the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet under Section 376-AB, 342, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Tarapur P.S. Case No. 179 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO Act)-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge-VI, Munger.

Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T