Vikram Kumar @ Chunnu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16170 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2021 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== VIKRAM KUMAR @ CHUNNU S/O- DILIP KUMAR PUSHP R/OVILLAGE- HEMATPUR, P.S.- FATEHPUR, DIST.- GAYA. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner is alleged to have abducted the minor daughter of the informant on the false pretext of solemnization of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. For the alleged occurrence of 15.5.2021, the FIR was lodged on 20.5.2021 after delay of five days. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16170 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 2/2 para -3 of the bail petition. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 17.1.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR who has specifically been alleged to abduct the daughter of the informant. The victim/informant's daughter recovered and her statement has been recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C. in which she stated that the petitioner forcibly took away to his house and committed rape with her after giving intoxicated material. It is further submitted that the witnesses of the case have supported the prosecution.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Amandeep/- U T