Niranjan Yadav @ Ghoncha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20396 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2024 Thana- SIGAUDI District- Patna ====================================================== Niranjan Yadav @ Ghoncha Son of Bhagwan Yadav @ Bhagwan Das Yadav Resident of Village - Dewariya, Police Station - Sigori in the district of Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

XXX Daughter of Raghvendra Yadav Resident of Village - Dewariya, Police Station - Sigori in the district of Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Navin Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Asha Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No.04 arising out of Sigori P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 76, 3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 8/12 of POCSO Act. Petitioner has two criminal antecedents.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 31.12.2024, the informant made a written application to the SHO, alleging therein that when she was returning from her study, three named accused persons including the petitioner intercepted her and had forcefully, with the help of one boy, thrown her in the field and thereafter, the victim try to flee, she was tied and was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20396 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 2/3 threatened to keep mum.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case and it is due to some previous land dispute the name of the petitioner has been inserted in the present case. The learned counsel has further stated that during the pendency of this application, the parties have entered into a compromise and he has filed a supplementary affidavit bringing the said compromise on record, which was filed before the learned Court below, wherein it has been stated that the parties have entered into a compromise and the prosecution party would not oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner. The learned counsel has lastly submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2025, though he has two criminal cases against his name, but he is on bail in the said two cases.

5. The learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State does not dispute the factum of compromise entered between the parties.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the respective parties and taking into account the fact that there is a compromise between the parties and a compromise petition has been filed by the respective parties before the learned court below and also taking into account that the petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20396 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 3/3 02.01.2025, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.

8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Patna, in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 04 of 2025 arising out of Sigori P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T