Arman Ali @ Musan Mian v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27858 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2020 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== ARMAN ALI @ MUSAN MIAN Son of Kudush Miyan Resident of Village - Bharandua, P.S.- Chenari, District - Rohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Asha Devi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-12-2021 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Petitioner who is in custody since 24.08.2020 seeks bail in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 139 of 2020 dated 22.08.2020 registered for offence punishable under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case in brief is that information given by the brother of the victim girl aged about 16 years that she got missing from the sewing classes at village Hata and, accordingly, he had every doubt that one Bhola Kumar and Musan Mian who used to talk with the victim girl have kidnapped his sister and till the date of lodging of the FIR, the victim was not recovered.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that no offence as alleged in the FIR has taken place

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27858 of 2021(3) dt.15-12-2021 2/2 and the story of the prosecution is false, fabricated and concocted. He further submits that victim was not recovered from the house of the petitioner or from the possession of the petitioner and just on suspicion his name has been taken by the brother of the victim who has inimical terms with the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that from the perusal of the entire case diary, it appears that the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that the petitioner has forcibly kidnapped her and committed rape repeatedly and as such the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. Considering the rival submissions of the parties, allegation made in the FIR and the material has surfaced in course of investigation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed. It is however observed that the Court below should hold the trial expeditiously.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T