Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41833/2017dismissed

Ramu Rishi v. The State Of Bihar

2017-10-10Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41833 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2017 Thana -RAUTRA District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Ramu Rishi Son of Late Dinesh Rishi, R/o Village- Chandwa, P.S.- Rautara, District- Katihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of regular bail in connection with Rautara P.S.Case No.6 of 2017 corresponding to G.R.No.168 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 363, 36A, 372 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The case is under Section 366A and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner is named in the FIR. It further appears that the petitioner has taken the girl to Delhi and committed rape upon her.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that she is a consenting party and later on, on the pressure of the family members she has made statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. making all sorts of allegation against the petitioner. The

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41833 of 2017 (3) dt.10-10-2017 2/2 petitioner is in custody for seven months.

Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that the girl has supported the prosecution case in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and also stated about commission of rape upon her and further the girl is aged about 13 years.

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, however, sine the petitioner is in custody for seven months, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of nine months.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

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