Sintu Kumar @ Rajnath @ Sintu Kumar Ramnath v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33535 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -94 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHILA PS District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== SINTU KUMAR @ RAJNATH @ SINTU KUMAR RAMNATH S/o Mahesh Mahto, R/o Vill.- Golakpur, P.S.- Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B. Singh, Advocate Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 20-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is in custody since 30.12.2017 in connection with Jehanabad Mahila P.S. Case No.94 of 2017, POCSO Trial No.07 of 2018 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, which is pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Jehanabad.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that medical evidence which has come in the case diary does not support any allegation.

Diary in the present case was called for, which has since been received.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33535 of 2018 (5) dt.20-07-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the State after perusal of the case diary submits that although the medical report does not support the occurrence, the child has categorically stated that the petitioner had committed sexual offence on her. In view of such facts and circumstances and the material which has surfaced in the case diary, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. It is, accordingly, rejected. (Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U T