Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19992/2017dismissed

Satrughan Rai @ Satarwa Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2017-06-28Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19992 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -233 Year- 2016 Thana -KADWA District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Satrughan Rai @ Satarwa Rai S/o Anandi Lal Rai @ Bahara Rai resident of Village - Sikarpur, P.S. - Balia Belon, District - Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Singh. : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sakir Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kadwa (Baliya Belon) P.S. Case No. 233 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing rape on the informant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case as he has married with a muslim girl for that he has also been assaulted by the villagers of the informant, for which the petitioner has filed a case against them. Further, medical report of the informant does not support the prosecution story as no sign of rape was found. Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 13.10.2016.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19992 of 2017 (3) dt.28-06-2017 2/2 Having heard both sides, considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape on the informant, as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for grant of regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, it appears that in this case charge has already been famed, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of seven months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the court below itself, which will be considered by the court below on the basis of materials available on record.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T