Sonu @ Farhan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16393 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2024 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran ====================================================== Sonu @ Farhan S/o Nesar Ahmad R/o vill - Santpur, PS- Nautan, DistrictWest Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mohamad Alam @ Md. Manan S/o Late Afjal R/o Santpur, PS- Nautan, District- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Pritish Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Mayank Mohan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Nautan P. S. Case No. 98/2024 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 448, 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. Allegation against petitioner is that he entered the house of informant and outraged modesty of minor daughter of the informant. It is further alleged that petitioner also assaulted informant and snatched gold earrings worth Rs. 20,000/- of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16393 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 2/3 wife of informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both parties are co-villagers and due to petty dispute, this false and concocted has been lodged. F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of more than four days which itself raises doubt over veracity of the prosecution case. There is no injury report on record to support the allegations made in the F.I.R. Rest of the allegations are ornamental. It is further submitted that dispute has already been settled between the parties and in this regard, joint compromise petition has been filed on 12.02.2025 before the learned court below. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and he is in custody since 15.01.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant does not dispute the contention with regard to the compromise between the parties.
6. Considering the factum of compromise between the parties and period of custody, the bail application is allowed. Let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District & Sessions Judge VI cum Special Judge POCSO, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Nautan P. S. Case No. 98 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16393 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 3/3 2024.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T