Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16691 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2021 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== CHANDAN KUMAR Son of Daulat Ram @ Daulat Kumar Resident of Village- Salahpur, P.S.- Kajra, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution case, on the basis of written application of the informant Sanjana Kumari, on 08.02.2021 against the petitioner for the alleged occurrence on 07.01.2021 in the house of informant at village Pakdi. It has been alleged that informant went at village Salahpur with her aunt on 07.01.2021 where she met with accused petitioner and he started friendship with the informant and used to talk on mobile phone.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16691 of 2022(3) dt.30-08-2022 2/3 It has been alleged that in February 2020, the petitioner came at her house and he stayed for four days and during this period, the petitioner developed physical relationship with her by pretending to marry and the petitioner gifted Samsung mobile phone to the informant. It has been further alleged that whenever the informant asked about marriage, he assured that he is talking to his family members and he will marry with her. It has further been alleged that later the petitioner denied to marry.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that victim girl was recovered and her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that she has solemnized the marriage with the petitioner. He further submits that in fact the petitioner has not solemnized the marriage with the victim girl. The petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the basis of material available on the record and the case diary and submits that the victim girl also stated in her statement under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16691 of 2022(3) dt.30-08-2022 3/3 Section 164 Cr.P.C. that the petitioner has committed rape upon her.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 94 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 2nd West, Muzaffarpur.

Prayer is refused.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T