Ranjeet Ram @ Ranjeet Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16714 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Ranjeet Ram @ Ranjeet Kumar Ram Son Of Upendra Ram R/O VillagePathra, P.S.- Keoti, P.O.- Khirma, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anjani Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-07-2022 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 Sections 376, 354B, 354C, 323 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 67, 67A of the I.T. Act.

According to prosecution case, it is alleged that informant is married lady and she has got two children aged about 8 years and 6 years respectively. Informant's husband is residing in other state for his livelihood. In the year 2020 informant became ill then accused petitioner Ranjit Ram, who is a quack, visited informant's house and gave two tablet and after

2/4 consuming tablet informant became unconscious but the petitioner went from there. It is further alleged that at about 12.00 in midnight the accused petitioner again came to informant's house and committed rape upon her and also made a video and again after two days he came to her house and after showing the video again committed rape upon her. It is further alleged that on 30.05.2021 informant's husband came then he came to know that the petitioner had viral the video and then she narrated all the things to her husband Ganesh Sah and then on 31.05.2021 informant along with her husband and Bhaisur went to house of Ranjit Ram and told about the incident to Upendar Ram.

It is further alleged that Upendra Ram abused the informant and on protest made by the informant then Upendar Ram caught hair of the informant and pulled down on the ground and assaulted her with fists and slaps. 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 before lodging the present F.I.R. i.e. Mahila P.S. Case No. 57 of 2021, the husband of the informant namely Ganesh Sah has lodged the case against the petitioner in Keoti P.S. Case No.

3/4 Indian Penal Code for the same occurrence and stated different story by admitting that there is illegal relation of his wife with the petitioner with her consent. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and in fact the petitioner has granted bail by the court below itself in Keoti P.S. Case No. 87 of 2021 and in the present case the petitioner is in custody since 15.08.2021. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 57 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the

4/4 evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

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