Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39570/2017rejected

Tunna Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-19Mr. Justice Prakash Chandra Jaiswal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39570 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -228 Year- 2017 Thana -HARSIDHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Tunna Paswan, son of Ramadhar Paswan, resident of village Jaga Pakar, P.S Harsidhi, District East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Panchanand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 19-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Harsidhi P.S. Case No.228 of 2007 registered under Sections 376 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have committed rape against the daughter of the informant when she had gone to graze her she-goat.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no concern with the said occurrence. He has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of one Munna Thakur as he has defeated him in the Mukhiya election by opposing him. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the occurrence of rape committed against

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39570 of 2017 (02) dt.19-08-2017 -2her but the doctor has not found any sign of rape on her. From perusal of statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it appears that though she has denied committing of rape against her but she has divulged that petitioner had disrobed her and himself and pressed her breast. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage. However, he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Trivedi/- U T