Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16375 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-719 Year-2021 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Sonu Kumar Son Of Jogindra Singh R/O Village- Sotichak, P.S.- Fatua, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Awadhesh Prasad Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 30-09-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 719 of 2021 lodged under Sections 419, 420, 342, 392, 376(d), 364, 506/34 of the I.P.C. As per the prosecution case, the informant who is the victim has narrated before Fatuha Police Station that she has to go Muzaffarpur and for that she has been searching an autoricksaw by committing conspiracy, accused persons brought the informant and her daughter of 3 years at a lonely place, taken money from her A.T.M. and imposing threat of killing her child. All accused persons including the petitioner raped her and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16375 of 2022(4) dt.30-09-2022 2/2 left alone on N.H from where she met with police and then filed the present F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his antecedent is clean. He is in custody since 20.09.2021. He submits that the medical report has not supported the statement of F.I.R. As per the report of Department of Pathology, no live or dead spermatozoa seen in the semen submitted. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is subject to the sufferance of heinous crime of rape by the accused persons including the present petitioner. He further submits that the mobile location of the accused persons and the victim are same.
In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) prakashmani/- U T