Satrudhan Mahto @ Satrudhan Mahato v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 27514 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2019 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SATRUDHAN MAHTO @ SATRUDHAN MAHATO Son of Late Ram Jatan Mahto Resident of Village and P.S. - Kanhauli, District - Sitamarhi (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shankar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyadeo Singh Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-03-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 03 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner by filing supplementary affidavit in which he has annexed the certificate given by the Sarpanch that both the parties have entered into compromise and they are staying together.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 27514 of 2021(3) dt.21-03-2022 2/2 In view of the above, the present anticipatory bail application is allowed.

Accordingly, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Session Judge, VI cum Special Court, POCSO Act, Sitamarhi, in connection with Sitamarhi Mahila P.S. Case No. 03 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

At the time of accepting the bail bond of the petitioner, the Court below shall verify the fact of compromise and if the wife supports the factum of compromise then the bail bond shall be accepted and if the factum of compromise is denied by the wife then the petitioner shall be taken into custody and a criminal case shall also be instituted against the Surpanch who has given the certificate.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T