Ram Kailash Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32229 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -46 Year- 2016 Thana -AADAPUR DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Ram Kailash Giri Son Bashu Giri, Resident of Village-Jhitkahiya, P.S.- Adapur, District-East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Nand Kumar Mr. Kundan Rathore ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2017 This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Adapur P.S. Case No. 46 of 2016 registered for the offence(s) under section(s) 366, 376(G), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner and other accused persons of taking the victim girl to Rajasthan and there they have committed rape upon her.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case, as it appears from the fact that though she herself fled away from the house and if she was kidnapped and was taken to Rajasthan, information should be given to the Police, but no information was given about her kidnapping and when she returned, the present

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32229 of 2017 (3) dt.01-08-2017 2/2 case has been lodged. Further submission is that earlier a case has been lodged by the petitioner against the family members of the informant and as such, the petitioner has been made accused in his case.

Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the informant and they oppose the prayer of bail, stating that there is allegation of rape and the statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr. PC. itself shows that one of the co-accused persons has made objectionable video graph of the victim girl.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and try to conclude the same within seven months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

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