Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15975/2020bail rejected

Pintu Kumar @ Tutoo Yadav @ Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-05Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15975 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-452 Year-2019 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Tutoo Yadav @ Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar Yadav Son of Siyaram Yadav Resident of Village - Mirdaul, P.S.- Narpatganj, Distt - Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Anil Prasad Singh For the State :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar For the Informant :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 452 of 2019 corresponding to Special (POCSO) Case No. 44 of 2019 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 354A, 354B, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of POCSO Act.

As per the prosecution case, this petitioner is alleged to have tried to molest victim (informant) and made indecent assault to her and her family members.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that due to enmity and grudge, the present false case has been lodged against this petitioner. The victim is major and as such, POCSO Act is not attracted against this petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15975 of 2020(5) dt.05-01-2021 2/2 However, learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It was submitted by the counsel for informant that there is direct and specific allegation against this petitioner for attempting to commit sexual assault with the informant, which has also been supported by the victim (informant), in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Considering the nature of allegation and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.) anay/- U T